Your message dated Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:25:22 -0800
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#612232: ping6: do not correctly retrive hosts with 
CNAME
has caused the Debian Bug report #612232,
regarding ping6: do not correctly retrive hosts with CNAME
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)


-- 
612232: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=612232
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: iputils-ping
Version: 3:20100418-3
Severity: normal


Simple tests

$ host ftp-stud.hs-esslingen.de
ftp-stud.hs-esslingen.de is an alias for rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de.
rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de has address 129.143.116.10
rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de mail is handled by 50 rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de.
$ ping6 ftp-stud.hs-esslingen.de
unknown host
$

$ host debian.mirror.cambrium.nl
debian.mirror.cambrium.nl is an alias for mirror.cambrium.nl.
mirror.cambrium.nl has address 217.19.16.188
mirror.cambrium.nl has IPv6 address 2a02:58:3:2:80::1
$ ping6 debian.mirror.cambrium.nl
unknown host
$

host with no CNAME
$ host mirror.eu.oneandone.net
mirror.eu.oneandone.net has address 195.20.242.90
mirror.eu.oneandone.net has IPv6 address 2001:8d8:2:1::c314:f25a
$ ping6 mirror.eu.oneandone.net
connect: Network is unreachable      # resolving OK
$


ping (over ipv4) works without problem in all 3 cases.

Similar problem is with traceroute6 and mtr tools (from mtr-tiny package). :/




-- System Information:
Debian Release: 6.0
  APT prefers stable
  APT policy: (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-686 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale: LANG=pl_PL.utf8, LC_CTYPE=pl_PL.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) (ignored: LC_ALL 
set to pl_PL.utf8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages iputils-ping depends on:
ii  libc6                         2.11.2-11  Embedded GNU C Library: Shared lib
ii  libssl0.9.8                   0.9.8o-4   SSL shared libraries

iputils-ping recommends no packages.

iputils-ping suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information



--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 12:28:41AM +0100, Witold Baryluk wrote:
> $ host ftp-stud.hs-esslingen.de
> ftp-stud.hs-esslingen.de is an alias for rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de.
> rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de has address 129.143.116.10
> rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de mail is handled by 50 rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de.
> $ ping6 ftp-stud.hs-esslingen.de
> unknown host
> $

This is expected behavior; the DNS name does not resolve to an IPv6
address so ping6 cannot communicate with it.

> $ host debian.mirror.cambrium.nl
> debian.mirror.cambrium.nl is an alias for mirror.cambrium.nl.
> mirror.cambrium.nl has address 217.19.16.188
> mirror.cambrium.nl has IPv6 address 2a02:58:3:2:80::1
> $ ping6 debian.mirror.cambrium.nl
> unknown host
> $

I cannot reproduce the behavior you're describing. Ping6 is able to ping
the host in question:
minas:~$ host debian.mirror.cambrium.nl
debian.mirror.cambrium.nl is an alias for mirror.cambrium.nl.
mirror.cambrium.nl has address 217.19.16.188
mirror.cambrium.nl has IPv6 address 2a02:58:3:2:80::1
minas:~$ ping6 debian.mirror.cambrium.nl
PING debian.mirror.cambrium.nl(mirror.cambrium.nl) 56 data bytes
64 bytes from mirror.cambrium.nl: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=102 ms
64 bytes from mirror.cambrium.nl: icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=102 ms
64 bytes from mirror.cambrium.nl: icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=102 ms
64 bytes from mirror.cambrium.nl: icmp_seq=4 ttl=57 time=102 ms
^C
--- debian.mirror.cambrium.nl ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3000ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 102.082/102.231/102.463/0.353 ms

Considering this, and your followup mail, and the fact that it has been
ages since you reported this bug (apologies for such a slow response!),
I'm going to close the bug. If this was a widespread problem it most
certainly would have received more attention by now.

If you disagree with this, and continue to have problems that you need
help diagnosing, please reopen this bug.

noah

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---

Reply via email to