From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#47431: Process Whois connection broken by remote peer. Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 11:38:50 +0300 Message-ID: <83a6qmmk11.fsf@gnu.org> References: <835z1dp0qg.fsf@gnu.org> <83y2e9nhne.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgynp9t5.fsf@gnus.org> <406246af7fb57420287b@heytings.org> <83k0pqmulc.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="10785"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: larsi@gnus.org, 47431@debbugs.gnu.org, hongyi.zhao@gmail.com To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 29 10:39:32 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lQnQc-0002J1-50 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 10:39:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34488 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lQnQa-00049Y-TF for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 04:39:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39534) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lQnQM-000493-UW for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 04:39:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:36247) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lQnQM-0004Ls-LW for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 04:39:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lQnQM-0005s5-Hw for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 04:39:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 08:39:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 47431 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 47431-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B47431.161700712822548 (code B ref 47431); Mon, 29 Mar 2021 08:39:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 47431) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Mar 2021 08:38:48 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47793 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lQnQ6-0005rb-T5 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 04:38:47 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:46472) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lQnQ5-0005rP-KI for 47431@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 04:38:46 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:39972) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lQnQ0-00047z-91; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 04:38:40 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:1722 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lQnPz-00015f-MI; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 04:38:40 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Gregory Heytings on Mon, 29 Mar 2021 07:35:37 +0000) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:203224 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 07:35:37 +0000 > From: Gregory Heytings > cc: larsi@gnus.org, 47431@debbugs.gnu.org, hongyi.zhao@gmail.com > > > >> IOW, without a built-in list, each whois query would create two > >> requests, one to whois.iana.org, and one to the actual whois server. > > > > I don't see any problems with that, do you? > > > > In principle, I don't see any problems. But I seem to recall that RMS > dislikes solutions that make unnecessary network connections, or IOW that > avoidable network connections should be avoided. > > If you agree on the general design, I'd be happy to implement it. I don't see a problem, no. We frequently make network connections when necessary. > Possibly with a cache to mitigate the above problem. I'd wait with caching until we see a performance problem. It isn't like people are expected to invoke this command many times in a row.