tag 421375 + wontfix thanks On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 01:51:18PM +0200, Bart Dopheide wrote: > Package: libc6 > Version: 2.3.6.ds1-13 > Severity: minor > > IMHO "No route to host" is not a string that covers EHOSTUNREACH > properly. In common situation it _is_ (that is why no one has complained > so far I guess), but I run into trouble with ICMP type 3.13 (admin > prohibited): > > # iptables -I INPUT 1 -p tcp --dport 42 -j REJECT --reject-with > icmp-admin-prohibited > # telnet localhost 42 > Trying 127.0.0.1... > telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: No route to host > > Clearly, there is a route to localhost, but perror describes > EHOSTUNREACH as 'No route to host'. In real life situation, I run into > trouble with access lists on (Cisco) routers. Testing the connection > with telnet gives me nothing but a red herring; checking and rechecking > every route tables on every router, traceroute-ing etc. and then > discovering with tcpdump that is it in fact admin-prohibited. > > Arguably, there is in fact no route, because the 'would-be route' is > prohibited, but then I say that the host might be reachable on other > ports, or with other protocols meaning that there _is_ a route > > The only suggestion that comes to my mind that covers the charge better, > is 'Destination unreachable'.
Unfortunately changing such an error message will probably breaks a lot of scripts. You have to live with it. Tagging this bug as a wontfix. -- .''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 : :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
