On 27/05/14 23:21, Lukasz Janyst wrote:
> Dear Ulf,
>
> On 27/05/14 22:01, Ulf Tigerstedt wrote:
>> We (at NDGF-T1) are trying to be ahead of demand and are testing dCache
>> as an IPv6 xrootd-server... but it's not going very well.
>
> great to hear, you should have contacted us earlier.
It just took me a bit of time to locate the list and compose the email..
before 4.0.0 got released.
>> http://xrootd.org/doc/dev4/XRdv300.htm#_Toc372751539 says that the node
>> response should look like:
>>
>> xy[::aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd.eee]:ppppp
>
> Yes, that's an old style of IPv6 encoded IPv4 address.
> xy[::ffff:aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd.eee]:ppppp also works fine.
>
>> Giving the xrdfs client an IPv6 answer like
>> Sw[::2001:948:40:2:0:0:0:149]:1094 causes the client to sputter out
>> "Invalid address" and refuses to work.
>
> It prints the error message, because this in fact is an invalid IPv6
> address. You should have returned [2001:948:40:2:0:0:0:149]:1094
Ah, but that's not how the documentation is written.
aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd.eee
is the IPv4 portion of the IPV6 node address, for IPV4
environments. Otherwise, a true IPV6 address is returned.
So by the documentation xy[::full IPv6 address]:port is the correct
response, as the leading [:: always should be there.
Bug in documentation then?
--
Ulf Tigerstedt || CSC Oy || NDGF
Computing Environments group
(NGI_FI and NGI_NDGF) deputy manager
GSM +358503818558 || +35894572279
Keilaranta 14 || Espoo || Finland
########################################################################
Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list
To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-L&A=1
