On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 08:51:32AM -0800, Noah Meyerhans wrote: > > It is incompatible with telnet and all other utilities I tried, which means > > that debugging with ping now is moot. > > It does not invalidate ping's usefulness for debugging. When you > specify a scope explicitly, it is respected. This is exactly the > behavior you need when debugging.
I meant: you configure some service to access [fe80::1]:80 it does not work you debug with ping fe80::1 it works. Ok, you ponder. Hmm. Maybe you think to use telnet fe80::1 80 and then you see it does not work and you pat yourself and add %eth1 With pre-buster behaviour, you immediately see the problem with ping. > Right. A scope is required in order to fully specify the address. > That's clear enough. However, there's nothing in there that forbids a > client from choosing a scope based on routing rules or some other > mechanism when a scope isn't explicitly provided by the user. getaddrinfo(3) does not: it returns a zero scope id, most programs use getaddrinfo(3) without any additional setting of the scope ID, unlike ping. Anyway, if you don't think this is a bug, no matter for me. I know now that ping does not work like most programs with addresses that requires a scope ID. And it is now documented on bugs.debian.org if it needs to be.
