RFR: JDK-8280498: [aix]: jdk/java/net/Inet4Address/PingThis.java fails

[Christoph Langer]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2022 12:59:25 GMT, Michael Felt <duke at openjdk.java.net> 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 IPv6 address. '::1' must be used instead.
>> 
>> ping: bind: The socket name is not available on this system.
>> ping: bind: The socket name is not available on this system.
>> PING ::1: (::1): 56 data bytes
>> 64 bytes from ::1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=0.037 ms
>> 64 bytes from ::1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=0.045 ms
>> 
>> --- ::1 ping statistics ---
>> 2 packets transmitted, 2 packets received, 0% packet loss
>> round-trip min/avg/max = 0/0/0 ms
>> PING ::1: (::1): 56 data bytes
>> 64 bytes from ::1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=0.052 ms
>> 64 bytes from ::1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=0.047 ms
>> 
>> --- ::1 ping statistics ---
>> 2 packets transmitted, 2 packets received, 0% packet loss
>> 
>> 
>> A long commit message. 
>> 
>> This came to light because some systems failed with IPv4 (those that passed
>> replaced 0.0.0.0 with the default router. but most just fail - not substituting
>> 0.0.0.0 with 127.0.0.1. However, InetAddress.getByName("") returns 127.0.0.1
>> which compares well with other platform's behavior.
>
> I was affiliated with IBM. I am more affiliated with Adoptium (was 
> OpenJDK) these days.
> 
> However, as most of the work that IBM will be doing (that they took over 
> from you) is hosted at the same location - I do assist IBM with the 
> basic setup and config.
> 
> The testing (and related PR's) comes from the testing done by Adoptium.
> 
> On 18/01/2022 07:29, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
>>
>> Hi @aixtools <https://github.com/aixtools>,
>>
>> Welcome! Good job with aixtools.net, we used it quite a bit over the 
>> years :)
>>
> a bit sad to see 'used' (past tense) - but very glad I could help. I 
> hate, well, try VERY VERY hard to avoid, unneeded dependencies.
> 
> I am told my work on github/cpython (helped) convinced IBM to use XLC as 
> compiler for Python on AIX 7.3 - so that is a step forward (imho).
> 
>> About your patch, probably it will be ignored in this form. Some notes:
>>
>>   * you need an official JBS issue for the toolchain to notify
>>     relevant mailing lists. I can open one for you if you can give me
>>     a short concise bug text explaining the issue.
>>
> Would appreciate that: I'll get back on the consise text. Have to find 
> my C program I used for testing the library call. From memory, an 
> argument (""), i.e., null-length string behaves as expected for 
> "0.0.0.0", whereas (NULL) does not (fails iirc), and "0.0.0.0" is taken 
> as a valid address - that it fails to resolve.
> 
> And, also, "::0" is simply refused (also by ping on CLI), so to get that 
> to work as expected ping to "::1" - which has been available since 1997 
> (iirc, when AIX 4.3.0 was released with dual stack support (i.e., "::1" 
> does not need `autoconf6` to be called to be available, it is always there).
> 
> So, you conld consider it a bug that the AIX library does not properly 
> handle NULL (as documented, iirc), and certainly an inconvience that 
> "0.0.0.0" is not handled the same way by the library function - compared 
> to the "ping" command (where some environments transform "0.0.0.0" to 
> the IP of the default router. Not been able to figure out how that 
> happens (or where) - but I think some routers might be responding to 
> "0.0.0.0" as "here" as was stated in the ancient docs re: meaning of 
> "0.0.0.0".
> 
> If above is sufficient for the JBS issue - fantistic - otherwise I'll 
> try and get something less chatty from code.
> 
>>   * we have a ppc/aix mailing list. It's a bit deserted, but still a
>>     good place to ask around or notify ppl of your intent to patch.
>>     https://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/ppc-aix-port-dev
>>
> registering...
>>
>>   * and of course, we need you to sign the OCA.
>>
> where is that?
>>
>> Officially, I think IBM is now maintainer of the AIX port (they took 
>> over from us, SAP). Are you affiliated with IBM?
>>
>> Cheers, Thomas
>>
>> —
>> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub 
>> <https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/7013#issuecomment-1015109827>, or 
>> unsubscribe 
>> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACSZR5NEO5PKWZSLMNIR26DUWUCGPANCNFSM5LUAHSPA>.
>> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: 
>> ***@***.***>
>>

Hi, @aixtools,
you will also first have to take care for the oca. Before that state isn't clear, none of the discussions on this PR will be forwarded to the mailing lists.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7013