[erlang-questions] Possible hostname handling bug in node handshake procedure?

[Bengt Kleberg]

Greetings,

What are your ideas about both parts of the node name? Should they be
case insensitive or just the host name part?

Consider the node aA@REDACTED

It might be confusing to have
net_adm:ping(aA@REDACTED) => pong
but then get
net_adm:ping(aa@REDACTED) => pang

So we probably should have case insensitivity here. But then we have to
explain why aA =:= aa is false in all the rest of the code.


Perhaps this is a problem only for me.


bengt
 
On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 09:47 +0100, Maas-Maarten Zeeman wrote:
> Today I stumbled upon some strange behavior when using net_adm:ping.  
> I  was trying to connect two machines, buka  and Edo on the same lan,  
> but it just would get them to talk to each other. Net_adm:ping worked  
> in one way only. Normal ping worked both ways, double checked if there  
> where firewall rules. I even looked at the network packets, which I  
> could see arriving at both ends. Then it slowly dawned on me. One of  
> the hosts has a hostname with a capital in it. so I tried to the exact  
> name. It worked...
> 
> Here is what happens.
> 
> (a@REDACTED)1> net_adm:ping(b@REDACTED).
> **long wait**
> pang
> (a@REDACTED)2> net_adm:ping(b@REDACTED).
> pong
> 
> In both situations the network packets arrive at b@REDACTED To me it looks
> like there is a case sensitivity problem with the hostname handling in  
> the  handshake procedure.
> 
> (a@REDACTED)51> net_adm:ping(a@REDACTED).
> pong
> (a@REDACTED)52> net_adm:ping(a@REDACTED).
> pang
> 
> Shouldn't both calls return pong as hostnames should normally be  
> treated as case insensitive strings?
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Maas-Maarten Zeeman
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org
>