Hi Ratna,
Thank you for checking this. From the screenshot, I can see that the URLs https://www.xyz.com and https://www.abcdefpaul.com/ have I/O Error and No connection status. In my server they are listed as 'Unknown Host'. On checking our dev server, I can see that most of our valid external URLs are classified as 'Unknown host' and marked as 'Invalid'. So I doubt whether the URLs are invalidated because of this status('Unknown host').
If possible could you please try to replicate a scenario where the URL status is being marked as 'Unknown host'? In this case, could you please let me know whether linkchecker is treating them as valid or invalid URLs.
Thanks
Seetha
Solved! Go to Solution.
Views
Replies
Total Likes
Hi
I got the response, the current behavior is correct one. It should be invalid. It was bug till 6.1 and then got fixed in 6.2.
Documentation needs to be edited with correct information. I have asked the team to do so.
~kautuk
Views
Replies
Total Likes
Hi,
Could someone please provide an update for this. On further analysis, I can see that all URLs with status 'Unknown host' in my server, are being marked as Invalid.
But as per the screenshot in AEM documentation, 'Unknown host' URLs are not invalid.
Thanks
Seetha
Views
Replies
Total Likes
Hi
I can reproduce the issue mentioned here.
I have asked the documentation team to check this.
~kautuk
Views
Replies
Total Likes
Hi Kautuk,
Thanks for the update.
On further analysis, I found that there is a difference in the way UnknownHostException is handled in AEM 6.2.
A lot of valid external URLs are throwing the Unknown Host exception on our AEM server(maybe because of proxy/network settings). But since these are correct URLs we need them to be treated as valid by LinkChecker.
Thanks
Seetha
Views
Replies
Total Likes
Hi
I got the response, the current behavior is correct one. It should be invalid. It was bug till 6.1 and then got fixed in 6.2.
Documentation needs to be edited with correct information. I have asked the team to do so.
~kautuk
Views
Replies
Total Likes
kautuksahni wrote...
Hi
I got the response, the current behavior is correct one. It should be invalid. It was bug till 6.1 and then got fixed in 6.2.
Documentation needs to be edited with correct information. I have asked the team to do so.
~kautuk
Thanks Kautuk.
Views
Replies
Total Likes
Views
Likes
Replies