On 30 Sep 2014, at 09:59, Michael McMahon <michael.x.mcma...@oracle.com> wrote:
> On 30/09/14 17:41, Mark Sheppard wrote:
>> thanks Chris ... so shall we go with the simplest thing that works :-)
>> i.e. somehost.some-domain ?
>>
>
> Maybe include a few random characters in the top-level domain.
> The list of TLDs has expanded so much in recent years, you never
> know what might happen
My preference is to keep it simple, even a garbled string TLD ( which will be
unlikely to ever be added ). So long as it is reproducible, reliable, and easy
to diagnose if something goes wrong.
-Chris.
> Michael
>
>> M.
>>
>> On 30/09/2014 17:35, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>>>
>>> On 30 Sep 2014, at 08:47, Daniel Fuchs <daniel.fu...@oracle.com> 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 :-)
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>> 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…
>>>
>>> The collision here is as a result of the top-level domain, so I’m not sure
>>> it is necessary to “randomize” the fully qualified domain name.
>>>
>>> -Chris.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> best regards,
>>>>
>>>> -- daniel
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -Alan
>>>
>>
>
