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#46342: 28.0.50; socks-send-command munges IP address bytes to UTF-8 Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:04:56 +0200 Message-ID: <83o8grj4d3.fsf@gnu.org> References: <875z355sh9.fsf@neverwas.me> <83pn1do008.fsf@gnu.org> <87r1lt2s8k.fsf@neverwas.me> <83czxdns61.fsf@gnu.org> <874kils22e.fsf@neverwas.me> <831rdpkyl6.fsf@gnu.org> <87ft24njud.fsf@neverwas.me> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="6949"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 46342@debbugs.gnu.org To: "J.P." Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 10 17:06:19 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 1l9s0Q-0001c5-R4 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 17:06:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55612 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l9s0P-0005cX-Sq for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:06:17 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34558) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l9s0A-0005cN-Mu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:06:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:45415) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l9s0A-0006zY-Fe for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:06:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1l9s0A-0008F6-AL for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:06:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:06:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 46342 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 46342-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B46342.161297310731612 (code B ref 46342); Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:06:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 46342) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Feb 2021 16:05:07 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56961 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1l9rzG-0008Dm-T6 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:05:07 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:44700) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1l9rzD-0008DC-PV for 46342@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:05:05 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:46105) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l9rz8-0006Xs-4U; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:04:58 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2960 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1l9rz6-0008Kb-Ca; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:04:57 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87ft24njud.fsf@neverwas.me> (jp@neverwas.me) 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:199784 Archived-At: > From: "J.P." > Cc: 46342@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 05:16:58 -0800 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > what kind of string can this ADDRESS be? My reading of RFC 1928 is > > that it normally is an IP address, in which case encoding is not > > relevant, as it's an ASCII string. But it can also be a domain, right? > > This patch only affects IP addresses, but I'm happy to look into the > domain name form as well. Then I don't understand why we need to worry about encoding. IP addresses are pure ASCII strings, so they need no encoding whatsoever. I guess I will have to ask you to back up and describe what problems you saw with the original code, and show me the details of the strings involved in that. Thanks for the rest of your message, but I suggest that we limit ourselves to IP addresses for the time being, and only go to non-ASCII domains when we have the IP address use case figured out.