we had this over here at UPC as well. This did cost Sigi a release as well if you remember ;)
Most times this can be disabled by your provider. Just phone them and explain that they are breaking your computer and this creates costs by them not acting standard conform ;) LieGrue, strub ----- Original Message ----- > From: sebb <seb...@gmail.com> > To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org> > Cc: > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 9:18 PM > Subject: Re: [VOTE][CANCEL] Release of commons-email-1.3 based on RC4 > > On 11 December 2012 12:11, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 6:56 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On 11 December 2012 08:58, Thomas Neidhart > <thomas.neidh...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> > thanks for looking into it. >>> > >>> > I will fix the issues wrt build page, release notes and findbugs >>> warnings. >>> > >>> > Regarding the unit test failure: >>> > >>> > I have not seen the problem before, and just validated it. The > unit test >>> > tries to open a connection to an invalid url: > http://example.invalid >>> > For some reason this seems to succeed in your environment. Could > it be >>> that >>> > you have a custom hosts entry for this domain? >>> >>> Or it could be a faulty DNS server. >>> >>> I used to have this exact problem with the OpenDNS server. >>> They resolve unknown hosts to their home page (extra advertising). >>> They used to do this for *.invalid as well, but after years of >>> complaints that this behaviour was contrary to the RFC they fixed the >>> issue. >>> >>> Try pinging example.invalid and then do an nslookup on the IP address. >>> >> >> That is what Cox must be doing indeed: >> >> Pinging example.invalid [72.215.225.9] with 32 bytes of data: >> Request timed out. >> Request timed out. >> Request timed out. >> My browser redirects this IP to http://finder.cox.net/dnserror.html > > So Cox are violating the RFC. > > Perhaps you could direct them to the relevant RFC: > > There are several TLD names which are reserved by RFC 2606, section 2. > Amongst them is the TLD "invalid". > > <quote> > ".invalid" is intended for use in online construction of domain > names that are sure to be invalid and which it is obvious at a > glance are invalid. > </quote> > > Note the phrase "that are sure to be invalid". > An invalid domain name cannot have an IP address. > No DNS server should ever resolve addresses in the TLD "invalid". > >> Gary > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
