Seems fine to me Xuelei.
- Michael
On 19/08/13 06:56, Xuelei Fan wrote:
If no objections, I will push the change by COB Monday.
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 8/13/2013 4:29 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
Can I get an additional code review from networking team?
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 8/12/2013 2:07 PM, Weijun Wang
If no objections, I will push the change by COB Monday.
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 8/13/2013 4:29 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
> Can I get an additional code review from networking team?
>
> Thanks,
> Xuelei
>
> On 8/12/2013 2:07 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> new webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8020842/
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 10:08:35AM -0700, Mike Duigou wrote:
> I've been confused through this discussion as to why a trailing dot would be
> regarded as illegal.
>
> Historically a trailing dot has been frequently (though not universally) used
> to denote a fully qualified domain name.
>
> htt
On Aug 16, 2013, at 1:08, Mike Duigou wrote:
> I've been confused through this discussion as to why a trailing dot would be
> regarded as illegal.
>
The discussion is too long to find the final decision easily. A IDN with
trailing dot should be regarded as legal IDN. This update is trying to
I've been confused through this discussion as to why a trailing dot would be
regarded as illegal.
Historically a trailing dot has been frequently (though not universally) used
to denote a fully qualified domain name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fully_qualified_domain_name
Is this use now ill
Can I get an additional code review from networking team?
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 8/12/2013 2:07 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
> new webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8020842/webrev.06/
On 8/12/13 1:45 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
new webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8020842/webrev.06/
Lines 280 and 333: How about we call them steps 8a and 8b?
Step 8 is referring to the steps in RFC 3490. Let's use "step 8".
You break the 1 <= len <= 63 check into two parts, that's w
new webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8020842/webrev.06/
> Lines 280 and 333: How about we call them steps 8a and 8b?
Step 8 is referring to the steps in RFC 3490. Let's use "step 8".
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 8/12/2013 11:11 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
> I think the fix is adequate and necessary.
if (q < input.length()) { // Ah, a dot!
out.append('.');
}
p = q + 1;
Using
if (q != input.length())
should be even better. The searchDots method clearly specifies that "or
if there is no dots, return the length of input string".
--Max
I think the fix is adequate and necessary.
One problem: lines 367-373 adds a new IAE to ToUnicode but the method
should not fail forever.
And some small comments on styles etc.
On 8/12/13 9:09 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
new webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8020842/webrev.05/
Lines 123
new webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8020842/webrev.05/
Added a new test to test illegal hostname in SNIHostName.
Xuelei
On 8/10/2013 10:49 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> It is pretty hard to get the issue solved in SNIHostName in a good
> sharp. Here is my try to state why
Hi Michael,
It is pretty hard to get the issue solved in SNIHostName in a good
sharp. Here is my try to state why we should fix the issue in IDN.
In SNIHostName, the following hostname are not accepted as valid hostname:
1. empty hostname
2. hostname ends with a trailing dot
3. hostname does not
Hi Michael,
I plan to address this issue in SNIHostName. I have filled another two
the potential bugs in IDN.
Thank you, and other people, for the feedback.
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 8/9/2013 11:25 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
> On 8/9/2013 7:31 PM, Michael McMahon wrote:
>> I don't see how this fixes the or
On 8/9/2013 7:31 PM, Michael McMahon wrote:
> I don't see how this fixes the original problem as the SNIHostName spec
> still doesn't like hostnames with a trailing '.'
>
The bug description did not reflect the IDN specification correctly. If
"com." is a valid IDN, SNIHostName should accept it an
I don't see how this fixes the original problem as the SNIHostName spec
still doesn't like hostnames with a trailing '.'
I'd prefer to check first where that requirement is coming from, if it is
actually necessary, and if not consider removing it from SNIHostName.
If it is necessary, then the che
On Aug 9, 2013, at 14:08, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
> Xuelei,
>
> 119 p = q + 1;
> 120 if (p < input.length() || q == (input.length() - 1)) {
>
> Could be simplified to:
>
> q <= input.length()-1
>
It's cool!
Xuelei
> -Dmitry
>
> On 2013-08-09 04:41, Xuelei Fan wrote:
Xuelei,
119 p = q + 1;
120 if (p < input.length() || q == (input.length() - 1)) {
Could be simplified to:
q <= input.length()-1
-Dmitry
On 2013-08-09 04:41, Xuelei Fan wrote:
> Ping.
>
> Thanks,
> Xuelei
>
> On 8/7/2013 11:17 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
>> Please review t
Thanks for your feedback and suggestions.
Here is the new webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8020842/webrev.02/
"." is regarded as valid IDN in this update.
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 8/9/2013 10:50 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
> On 8/9/2013 10:14 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 8/9/13 9:37 AM, X
On 8/9/2013 11:24 AM, Matthew Hall wrote:
> But, DNS considers "." as the valid root zone...
>
Good! Looks like that IDN.toASCII(".") should returns ".", so that a
general domain name can always use IDN.toASCII() conversion instead of
throwing runtime exception.
Xuelei
But, DNS considers "." as the valid root zone...
--
Sent from my mobile device.
Xuelei Fan wrote:
>On 8/9/2013 10:14 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 8/9/13 9:37 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
>>> On 8/9/2013 9:22 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
I tried nslookup. Those with ".." inside are illegal,
On 8/9/2013 10:14 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 8/9/13 9:37 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
>> On 8/9/2013 9:22 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
>>> I tried nslookup. Those with ".." inside are illegal,
>>>
>>> $ nslookup com..
>>> nslookup: 'com..' is not a legal name (empty label)
>>>
>>> but
>>>
>>> $ nslookup
On 8/9/13 9:37 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
On 8/9/2013 9:22 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
I tried nslookup. Those with ".." inside are illegal,
$ nslookup com..
nslookup: 'com..' is not a legal name (empty label)
but
$ nslookup .
Server:192.168.10.1
Address:192.168.10.1#53
Non-authoritative
On 8/9/2013 9:22 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
> I tried nslookup. Those with ".." inside are illegal,
>
> $ nslookup com..
> nslookup: 'com..' is not a legal name (empty label)
>
> but
>
> $ nslookup .
> Server:192.168.10.1
> Address:192.168.10.1#53
>
> Non-authoritative answer:
> *** Can
I tried nslookup. Those with ".." inside are illegal,
$ nslookup com..
nslookup: 'com..' is not a legal name (empty label)
but
$ nslookup .
Server: 192.168.10.1
Address:192.168.10.1#53
Non-authoritative answer:
*** Can't find .: No answer
Also, since this bug was originally ab
Ping.
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 8/7/2013 11:17 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
> Please review the new update:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net./~xuelei/8020842/webrev.01/
>
> With this update, "com." is valid (return "com."); "." and
> "example..com" are invalid. And IAE will be thrown for invalid IDN.
>
> Than
Please review the new update:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net./~xuelei/8020842/webrev.01/
With this update, "com." is valid (return "com."); "." and
"example..com" are invalid. And IAE will be thrown for invalid IDN.
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 8/7/2013 10:18 PM, Michael McMahon wrote:
> On 07/08/13 15:13, X
On 07/08/13 15:13, Xuelei Fan wrote:
On 8/7/2013 10:05 PM, Michael McMahon wrote:
Resolvers seem to accept queries using trailing dots.
eg nslookup www.oracle.com.
or InetAddress.getByName("www.oracle.com.");
The part of RFC3490 quoted below seems to me to be saying
that the empty label impli
On 8/7/2013 10:05 PM, Michael McMahon wrote:
> Resolvers seem to accept queries using trailing dots.
>
> eg nslookup www.oracle.com.
>
> or InetAddress.getByName("www.oracle.com.");
>
> The part of RFC3490 quoted below seems to me to be saying
> that the empty label implied by the trailing dot i
Resolvers seem to accept queries using trailing dots.
eg nslookup www.oracle.com.
or InetAddress.getByName("www.oracle.com.");
The part of RFC3490 quoted below seems to me to be saying
that the empty label implied by the trailing dot is not regarded
as a label so that you don't end up calling t
Xuelei,
root label is an empty label[1], dot is a label separator, so in printed
form domain names is dot-terminated.
Please see also below inline.
[1]
RFC rfc1034.txt:
Internally, programs that manipulate domain names should represent them
as sequences of labels, where each label is a length o
On 8/7/2013 12:06 AM, Matthew Hall wrote:
> Trailing dots are allowed in plain DNS (thus almost surely in IDN),
> and the single dot represents the root zone. So you have to be
> careful making this sort of change to check the DNS RFCs first.
That's the first question we need to answer, whether ID
I don't really understand the reason for the restriction in SNIHostName
But, I guess that is where it should be enforced if it is required.
Michael.
On 06/08/13 17:43, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
Xuelei,
. (dot) is perfectly valid domain name and it means root domain so com.
is valid domain name a
Xuelei,
. (dot) is perfectly valid domain name and it means root domain so com.
is valid domain name as well.
It thinks to me that in context of methods your change we should ignore
trailing dots, rather than throw exception.
-Dmitry
On 2013-08-06 15:44, Xuelei Fan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please re
Take a look here for more clarity:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fully_qualified_domain_name
--
Sent from my mobile device.
Matthew Hall wrote:
>Trailing dots are allowed in plain DNS (thus almost surely in IDN), and
>the single dot represents the root zone. So you have to be careful
>making thi
Trailing dots are allowed in plain DNS (thus almost surely in IDN), and the
single dot represents the root zone. So you have to be careful making this sort
of change to check the DNS RFCs first.
Matthew.
--
Sent from my mobile device.
Weijun Wang wrote:
>I am not sure if IDN.java is the corre
On Aug 6, 2013, at 23:08, Weijun Wang wrote:
> I am not sure if IDN.java is the correct place to change. At least I've seen
> trailing dots in DNS entries. So maybe it's not so illegal.
>
Per RFC 1034, a domain name cannot end with dot. I will check other related
specifications. What's the c
I am not sure if IDN.java is the correct place to change. At least I've
seen trailing dots in DNS entries. So maybe it's not so illegal.
--Max
On 8/6/13 7:44 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
Hi,
Please review the bug fix to strict the illegal input checking in IDN.
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net./~
Hi,
Please review the bug fix to strict the illegal input checking in IDN.
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net./~xuelei/8020842/webrev.00/
Here is two test cases, which are expected to get IAE.
Case 1:
String host = IDN.toASCII(".", IDN.USE_STD3_ASCII_RULES);
Exception in thread "main" java.lang
38 matches
Mail list logo
