On Mon, 10 Jan 2022 15:56:07 GMT, Michael Felt wrote:
> with IP "0.0.0.0"
>
> - it either does nothing and ping fails, or, in some virtual environments
> is treated as the default route address.
> - IPv6 support for ::1 is available since 1977; however, ::0 is not accepted
> as a vaild psuedo IP
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 15:15:06 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
> From the description and evaluation of
> [JDK-7163874](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7163874) it seems that
> skipping this test on AIX would be reasonable.
>
> Some operating systems seem to accept 0.0.0.0 as input - and reply
On Mon, 10 Jan 2022 15:56:07 GMT, Michael Felt wrote:
> with IP "0.0.0.0"
>
> - it either does nothing and ping fails, or, in some virtual environments
> is treated as the default route address.
> - IPv6 support for ::1 is available since 1977; however, ::0 is not accepted
> as a vaild psuedo IP
On Mon, 10 Jan 2022 15:56:07 GMT, Michael Felt wrote:
> with IP "0.0.0.0"
>
> - it either does nothing and ping fails, or, in some virtual environments
> is treated as the default route address.
> - IPv6 support for ::1 is available since 1977; however, ::0 is not accepted
> as a vaild psuedo IP
-Original Message-
From: net-dev On Behalf Of Michael McMahon
Sent: Friday, 28 January 2022 16:14
To: net-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8280498: [aix]: jdk/java/net/Inet4Address/PingThis.java
fails
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 14:46:32 GMT, Michael Felt wrote:
>> If it d
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 15:11:04 GMT, Michael McMahon wrote:
>>> Or is it possible to change the implementation on AIX so the test passes
>>> without change?
>>
>> * Digging into the java guts to map "0.0.0.0" to "127.0.0.1" seems too far
>> to me - as I believe interfaces are not suppossed to be
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 14:46:32 GMT, Michael Felt wrote:
>> If it defeats the purpose, then it needs to be skipped.
>>
>> * When I was trying to understand the test, it seemed to be that it
>> _assumed_ that "0.0.0.0" was 'converted' to 127.0.0.1.
>> * If there is an international standard (ISO, P
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 14:37:00 GMT, Michael Felt wrote:
>> Or is it possible to change the implementation on AIX so the test passes
>> without change?
>
> If it defeats the purpose, then it needs to be skipped.
>
> * When I was trying to understand the test, it seemed to be that it _assumed_
> t
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 14:30:01 GMT, Michael McMahon wrote:
>> test/jdk/java/net/Inet4Address/PingThis.java line 62:
>>
>>> 60: else {
>>> 61: addrs.add("0.0.0.0");
>>> 62: }
>>
>> This conflicts with the purpose of the test. Maybe this test needs to be
>>
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 14:26:51 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
> > Does the label being removed mean the site knows I now have an _oca_?
>
> Yes. The oca label was removed by the bot. It also did sent the mail to the
> associated ML
> (https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2022-January/01738
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 14:28:43 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> with IP "0.0.0.0"
>>
>> - it either does nothing and ping fails, or, in some virtual environments
>> is treated as the default route address.
>> - IPv6 support for ::1 is available since 1977; however, ::0 is not accepted
>> as a vaild psu
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 13:52:12 GMT, Michael Felt wrote:
> Does the label being removed mean the site knows I now have an _oca_?
Yes. The oca label was removed by the bot. It also did sent the mail to the
associated ML
(https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2022-January/017386.html).
Y
On Mon, 10 Jan 2022 15:56:07 GMT, Michael Felt wrote:
> with IP "0.0.0.0"
>
> - it either does nothing and ping fails, or, in some virtual environments
> is treated as the default route address.
> - IPv6 support for ::1 is available since 1977; however, ::0 is not accepted
> as a vaild psuedo IP
On Thu, 20 Jan 2022 12:59:25 GMT, Michael Felt wrote:
>> with IP "0.0.0.0"
>>
>> - it either does nothing and ping fails, or, in some virtual environments
>> is treated as the default route address.
>> - IPv6 support for ::1 is available since 1977; however, ::0 is not accepted
>> as a vaild psu
On Thu, 20 Jan 2022 12:59:25 GMT, Michael Felt wrote:
>If above is sufficient for the JBS issue - fantistic - otherwise I'll
try and get something less chatty from code.
That would be nice.
>> * and of course, we need you to sign the OCA.
> where is that?
https://openjdk.java.net/contribute/ o
On Mon, 10 Jan 2022 15:56:07 GMT, Michael Felt wrote:
> with IP "0.0.0.0"
>
> - it either does nothing and ping fails, or, in some virtual environments
> is treated as the default route address.
> - IPv6 support for ::1 is available since 1977; however, ::0 is not accepted
> as a vaild psuedo IP
On Mon, 10 Jan 2022 15:56:07 GMT, Michael Felt wrote:
> with IP "0.0.0.0"
>
> - it either does nothing and ping fails, or, in some virtual environments
> is treated as the default route address.
> - IPv6 support for ::1 is available since 1977; however, ::0 is not accepted
> as a vaild psuedo IP
with IP "0.0.0.0"
- it either does nothing and ping fails, or, in some virtual environments
is treated as the default route address.
- IPv6 support for ::1 is available since 1977; however, ::0 is not accepted
as a vaild psuedo IPv6 address. '::1' must be used instead.
ping: bind: The socket name
18 matches
Mail list logo
