It's absolutely worth looking into and I'll get going on that, but I'd rather deal with it separately to the ipv4 stuff. IcmpSendEcho already appears to behave somewhat strangely, so I wouldn't necessarily assume that the ipv4 and ipv6 code will end up being identical.
-Rob On 21/09/16 05:35, Mark Sheppard wrote: > Hi Rob, > this looks good ... > > do you think there is any need to replicate these changes in > Inet6AddressImpl.c ? (or leave it alone and don't trouble trouble until > trouble troubles you :-) > > regards > Mark > > regards > Mark > On 21/09/2016 16:16, Rob McKenna wrote: > >Hi folks, > > > >I'd like to fix a bug caused by an incorrect assumption. The IcmpSendEcho* > >calls can actually return a similar set of errors regardless of whether the > >call itself failed or succeeded. This change checks that both the call and > >the ping were successful. In addition to that it takes a number of common > >failure causes into account before deciding to throw an exception. > > > >http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm/8159410/webrev.01/ > > > > -Rob >