RFR(XS): 8201369: Inet4AddressImpl_getLocalHostName reverse lookup on Solaris only

Mon Apr 16 09:29:29 UTC 2018

Hi Srividya,

thanks for doing this work.

Change looks good from my side, except for a small indentation flaw in lines 91 and 94 and the copyright year that needs to be adjusted. But I can fix this when I push it.

Let's wait for another review (Chris) before we can push it. I'll also do some testing.

I'll also take care of the backport after the push to jdk11.

Best regards
Christoph

From: Srividya Shamaiah [mailto:sshamaia at in.ibm.com]
Sent: Montag, 16. April 2018 10:44
To: Langer, Christoph <christoph.langer at sap.com>
Cc: Chris Hegarty <chris.hegarty at oracle.com>; OpenJDK Network Dev list <net-dev at openjdk.java.net>
Subject: RFR(XS): 8201369: Inet4AddressImpl_getLocalHostName reverse lookup on Solaris only

Hi Chris,
Please review the attached patch in
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mhorie/8201369/webrev/

Can you also backport this to JDK 8, we have customers waiting for this fix at JDK 8 level.

Thanks,
Srividya S

[Inactive hide details for Srividya Shamaiah---11/04/2018 03:35:38 PM---Thanks Chris , As you suggested, I will provide the patc]Srividya Shamaiah---11/04/2018 03:35:38 PM---Thanks Chris , As you suggested, I will provide the patch based on jdk 11. Thanks,

From: Srividya Shamaiah/India/IBM
To: "Langer, Christoph" <christoph.langer at sap.com<mailto:christoph.langer at sap.com>>
Cc: Chris Hegarty <chris.hegarty at oracle.com<mailto:chris.hegarty at oracle.com>>, OpenJDK Network Dev list <net-dev at openjdk.java.net<mailto:net-dev at openjdk.java.net>>
Date: 11/04/2018 03:35 PM
Subject: RE: 8169865 : Changes not ported to IPv4

________________________________

Thanks Chris , As you suggested, I will provide the patch based on jdk 11.

Thanks,
Srividya S

[Inactive hide details for "Langer, Christoph" ---11/04/2018 02:51:51 PM---Hi Srividya, I would also welcome this fix.]"Langer, Christoph" ---11/04/2018 02:51:51 PM---Hi Srividya, I would also welcome this fix.

From: "Langer, Christoph" <christoph.langer at sap.com<mailto:christoph.langer at sap.com>>
To: Srividya Shamaiah <sshamaia at in.ibm.com<mailto:sshamaia at in.ibm.com>>, Chris Hegarty <chris.hegarty at oracle.com<mailto:chris.hegarty at oracle.com>>
Cc: OpenJDK Network Dev list <net-dev at openjdk.java.net<mailto:net-dev at openjdk.java.net>>
Date: 11/04/2018 02:51 PM
Subject: RE: 8169865 : Changes not ported to IPv4
________________________________

Hi Srividya,

I would also welcome this fix.

Will you do the fix based on the jdk (11) depot? I think Java_java_net_Inet4AddressImpl_getLocalHostName should then be exactly the same as Java_java_net_Inet6AddressImpl_getLocalHostName. I can assist you with sponsoring/backporting to JDK8, if you like.

Best regards
Christoph

From: net-dev [mailto:net-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Srividya Shamaiah
Sent: Mittwoch, 11. April 2018 09:19
To: Chris Hegarty <chris.hegarty at oracle.com<mailto:chris.hegarty at oracle.com>>
Cc: OpenJDK Network Dev list <net-dev at openjdk.java.net<mailto:net-dev at openjdk.java.net>>
Subject: Re: 8169865 : Changes not ported to IPv4

Thank you Chris for opening the JIRA bug, I will work on the fix and contribute it .

Thanks,
Srividya S

[Inactive hide details for Chris Hegarty ---10/04/2018 08:51:05 PM---> On 10 Apr 2018, at 12:34, Srividya Shamaiah <sshamaia at in.]Chris Hegarty ---10/04/2018 08:51:05 PM---> On 10 Apr 2018, at 12:34, Srividya Shamaiah <sshamaia at in.ibm.com<mailto:sshamaia at in.ibm.com>> wrote: >

From: Chris Hegarty <chris.hegarty at oracle.com<mailto:chris.hegarty at oracle.com>>
To: Srividya Shamaiah <sshamaia at in.ibm.com<mailto:sshamaia at in.ibm.com>>
Cc: OpenJDK Network Dev list <net-dev at openjdk.java.net<mailto:net-dev at openjdk.java.net>>
Date: 10/04/2018 08:51 PM
Subject: Re: 8169865 : Changes not ported to IPv4

________________________________

> On 10 Apr 2018, at 12:34, Srividya Shamaiah <sshamaia at in.ibm.com<mailto:sshamaia at in.ibm.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> One of our customer reported a similar issue and the issue can be resolved through the bug fix 8169865 which was include at 8u152 level. We were looking this issue from AIX perspective as it did not do the reverse lookup with bug fix 8169865 (as reverse lookup is limited to solaris after the bug fix).
>
> While implementing the fix, we want to make sure the fix works for all scenario. As there is an inconsistency between IPv6 and IPv4 after 8169865 (as reverse lookup still exists for IPv4 on AIX and Linux), we are afraid whether customer can hit the same issue if they use IPv4.
>
> Please confirm whether it makes sense to remove the reverse lookup of IPv4 for AIX and linux platforms so that IPv4 and IPv6 processing is consistent for those platforms.

Yes, I believe it does.

I filed the follow JIRA issue to track this:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugs.openjdk.java.net_browse_JDK-2D8201369&d=DwIFAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=cY5OjfQF2gZ_G00XrJYGrxPgLDHmXjFqs49sDD9oJN0&m=-LhngTQSiYD1d12WSDvX2Jldxusyok9A7LqJ4ZEIzos&s=8fDzPwCaD2hwIOSWkfchiRBeDz3uSyzk81kDXZFarXo&e=

-Chris.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/attachments/20180416/469963e8/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 105 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/attachments/20180416/469963e8/image001-0001.gif>