Bug 843054 - nsswitch doesn't implement getaddrinfo(), plugins cannot supply link-local IPv6 addresses with scope id
Summary: nsswitch doesn't implement getaddrinfo(), plugins cannot supply link-local IP...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED UPSTREAM
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: glibc
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Carlos O'Donell
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
: 1118723 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks: 719178 887577
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2012-07-25 12:50 UTC by Pavel Šimerda (pavlix)
Modified: 2019-09-10 13:40 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2019-09-10 13:40:02 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Sourceware 14413 0 P2 NEW nsswitch doesn't implement getaddrinfo(), plugins cannot provide full getaddrinfo features 2021-01-08 14:09:18 UTC
Sourceware 19565 0 P2 NEW Consolidate NSS name resolution interfaces 2021-01-08 14:09:18 UTC

Description Pavel Šimerda (pavlix) 2012-07-25 12:50:17 UTC
GLIBC's name service switch doesn't provide a way to override getaddressinfo()
which is the only function that supports IPv6 link-local addresses.

IPv6 link-local addresses don't work without the interface name (when
written as text) that then translates to scope id.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2553

glibc-2.15-37.fc17.x86_64

Comment 1 Jeff Law 2012-07-25 14:03:34 UTC
Adding an override for getaddressinfo is something that would have to happen upstream.  As for the state of resolving ::1 style addresses, it's going to have to be reevaluated given the problems it's causing, it's on my list of things to reevaluate, but keeps getting preempted by burning issues.  See 808148.

Comment 2 Pavel Šimerda (pavlix) 2012-07-26 08:51:33 UTC
Just a sidenote that could help, FreeBSD is implementing this? How do we keep track of enhancement requests like this if they're closed UPSTREAM?

Comment 3 Jeff Law 2012-07-26 18:40:40 UTC
Best thing to do is open a report upstream.

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla

You're in a better position to argue for what you need that I -- I'm really just a caretaker for glibc for RHEL/Fedora until we can someone with more domain specific knowledge and an interest in the code.

Comment 4 Pavel Šimerda (pavlix) 2012-07-27 15:14:45 UTC
Thanks, Jeff.

Upstream bug: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14413

Comment 5 Pavel Šimerda (pavlix) 2012-12-18 14:15:06 UTC
Jeff, I need this to be tracked for Fedora features. I can assign it to myself if you wish so.

Comment 6 Jeff Law 2012-12-19 17:05:59 UTC
That fine.  Assign it to yourself or Carlos (codonell).  With Carlos officially on board, I'll be transferring my glibc responsibilities to him.

Comment 7 Fedora Admin XMLRPC Client 2013-01-28 20:07:57 UTC
This package has changed ownership in the Fedora Package Database.  Reassigning to the new owner of this component.

Comment 8 Fedora End Of Life 2013-07-04 05:43:56 UTC
This message is a reminder that Fedora 17 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 17. It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time
this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 
'version' of '17'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 17's end of life.

Bug Reporter:  Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that 
we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 17 is end of life. If you 
would still like  to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it 
against a later version  of Fedora, you are encouraged  change the 
'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 17's end of life.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

Comment 9 Jan Kurik 2015-07-15 15:05:13 UTC
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 23 development cycle.
Changing version to '23'.

(As we did not run this process for some time, it could affect also pre-Fedora 23 development
cycle bugs. We are very sorry. It will help us with cleanup during Fedora 23 End Of Life. Thank you.)

More information and reason for this action is here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora23

Comment 10 Florian Weimer 2016-02-04 16:02:22 UTC
*** Bug 1118723 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 11 Fedora End Of Life 2016-11-24 10:42:35 UTC
This message is a reminder that Fedora 23 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 23. It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time
this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora  'version'
of '23'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not 
able to fix it before Fedora 23 is end of life. If you would still like 
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version 
of Fedora, you are encouraged  change the 'version' to a later Fedora 
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

Comment 12 Fedora End Of Life 2016-12-20 12:16:34 UTC
Fedora 23 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2016-12-20. Fedora 23 is
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you
are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the
current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this
bug.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.

Comment 13 Florian Weimer 2019-09-10 13:40:02 UTC
This is being tracked upstream here: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14413


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.