thanks Daniel Alan
it was actually the domain foo.bar that proved to be a TLD for some
reason and resolved
to the special address 127.0.53.53, indicating a DNS problem.
so we could use your strategy on the domain part of the pseudo FQDN, and
a bit like
New York New York, we pseudo random name it twice ?
{"x-" + UUID.randomUUID().toString() + "-x.x-" +
UUID.randomUUID().toString() + "-x", null},
regards
Mark
On 30/09/2014 16:47, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
On 30/09/14 17:31, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 30/09/2014 08:21, Mark Sheppard wrote:
Hi
Please oblige and review the following small change to test
test/java/net/InetAddress/IPv4Formats.java
--- a/test/java/net/InetAddress/IPv4Formats.java Tue Sep 30
13:25:04 2014 +0100
+++ b/test/java/net/InetAddress/IPv4Formats.java Tue Sep 30
15:11:05 2014 +0100
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
{"126.1", "126.0.0.1"},
{"128.50.65534", "128.50.255.254"},
{"192.168.1.2", "192.168.1.2"},
- {"hello.foo.bar", null},
+ {"somehost.some-domain", null},
{"1024.1.2.3", null},
{"128.14.66000", null }
This looks okay to me, at least until somehost.some-domain starts to be
resolved to some address :-)
I wonder: would something like
"x-" + UUID.randomUUID().toString() + "-x.some-domain"
result in a syntactically valid address? If so it might
reduce the chances of collision...
best regards,
-- daniel
-Alan
