Modify

Opened 13 months ago

Closed 3 months ago

Last modified 5 weeks ago

#16073 closed enhancement (fixed)

ImageryCompare for dead layers

Reported by: marc_marc Owned by: team
Priority: normal Milestone: 18.12
Component: Unit tests Version:
Keywords: Cc:

Description

eli check and remove some not working layers.
those layers are show in "URLs found in JOSM but not in ELI" (that's right) but in blue (= should be checked).
To avoid the need to make the same check "by hand" for josm or to make a lookup in eli history for every layers, it would be nice if ImageryCompare (or a dedicated page) could make the same checks and/or used those checks. for exemple missing layer in josm that return a 404 could be tagged in red to easy see that they need to be renove also from josm.
of course it would be nice it the same tools could be shared between both "index" (I also did the same a request at eli)

NB: here is a POC that show removed eli layers not already removed from josm
NB: I start removing those 12 layers by hand, but adding this info in ImageryCompare 'll be usefull for everyone that use it.

Attachments (2)

NLSC.jpg (173.5 KB) - added by stoecker 4 months ago.
notforme.png (32.6 KB) - added by Don-vip 4 months ago.

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (105)

comment:1 Changed 13 months ago by Stereo

My POC works but is unreadable :). Basically it looks at the URLs that have disappeared in imagery.geojson since an arbitrary commit at the beginning of the year, keeps only those with } to filter out attribution URLs etc., and compares the URLs to the ones ImageryCompare says are missing.

comment:2 Changed 13 months ago by stoecker

I'm thinking about a way to detect dead entries. But it may take some time to think and implement a proper solution.

comment:3 Changed 13 months ago by Stereo

Martin over at ELI is working on the problem too. He's requesting tiles within the layer's bbox to make sure it's returning something.

comment:4 in reply to:  3 Changed 13 months ago by stoecker

Replying to Stereo:

Martin over at ELI is working on the problem too. He's requesting tiles within the layer's bbox to make sure it's returning something.

Jupp. That's one of the points ;-)

comment:5 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14482/josm:

see #16073, see #17056 - initialize imagery integration test

comment:6 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

First batch of errors:

outdated

Last edited 4 months ago by Don-vip (previous) (diff)

comment:7 Changed 4 months ago by Klumbumbus

Regarding https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps/France?action=diff&version=146 I think it was supposed to display the EULA in the language which is set in JOSM if available. Currently available are english and french: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_France/CRAIG/EULA

comment:8 Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

Seems there are some errors:

I think you should output >= 300 HTTP errors, so we can fix redirects as well. They should be warnings, not errors.

We have some certificate issues, probably due to missing full chain.

Last edited 4 months ago by stoecker (previous) (diff)

comment:9 in reply to:  7 Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

Replying to Klumbumbus:

Regarding https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps/France?action=diff&version=146 I think it was supposed to display the EULA in the language which is set in JOSM if available. Currently available are english and french: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_France/CRAIG/EULA

Yes. There is code in ImageryPreference.java for this. The Map change should be reverted and the check simply replace {lang} with the default "" for this test here.

comment:10 Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

In 14485/josm:

handle {lang} for EULA, see #16073

comment:11 Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

In 14487/josm:

more helpful exception text, see #16073

comment:12 Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

In 14488/josm:

add warning for 3xx status codes (non ATM), see #16073

comment:13 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14496/josm:

fix #17060, see #16073 - Support Internationalized domain names (IDN)

This allows JOSM to accesss https://öpnvkarte.de

comment:14 in reply to:  8 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

Replying to stoecker:

Do you mean you have already sent an e-mail, or do you want someone to do it?

comment:15 Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

Ooops. Should be "sent".

comment:16 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14497/josm:

fix #17060, see #16073 - update integration test

comment:17 Changed 4 months ago by Klumbumbus

Component: External imagery sourceUnit tests
Milestone: 18.12

comment:18 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14498/josm:

fix #17062, see #16073 - Load Taiwan Government Root CA certificate

This allows JOSM to accesss https://data.gov.tw/license

comment:19 Changed 4 months ago by Klumbumbus

For wiki:/Maps/Taiwan#NLSCOpenDataWMTS JOSM says "No layers defined by getCapabilities document: https://maps.nlsc.gov.tw/OpenData/wmts". Wrong WMTS file or a bug in JOSM?

comment:20 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

https://maps.nlsc.gov.tw seems dead, I have sent an e-mail to them

Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

Attachment: NLSC.jpg added

comment:21 in reply to:  20 Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

Replying to Don-vip:

https://maps.nlsc.gov.tw seems dead, I have sent an e-mail to them

Hmm, why?


Last edited 4 months ago by Don-vip (previous) (diff)

Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

Attachment: notforme.png added

comment:22 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

Because of this. But I don't know why, this is the only site I cannot access:

Last edited 4 months ago by Don-vip (previous) (diff)

comment:23 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

Is it IPv6 only? My DNS resolves to an IPv4 address while JOSM server resolves to an IPv6 one.

comment:24 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14499/josm:

see #16073 - initialize tile source

comment:25 in reply to:  23 Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

Replying to Don-vip:

Is it IPv6 only? My DNS resolves to an IPv4 address while JOSM server resolves to an IPv6 one.

Yes. IPv6 is broken for their site: https://[2001:e10:6040:143::28]/

comment:26 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14507/josm:

see #16073 - test tile source

comment:27 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

To test that max zoom is correct I need to know where to check. For local providers I simply choose the center of the bbox, but for global providers it is more tricky, as the max zoom isn't available globally. For example with ESRI, they provide the available resolutions per area. It appears the more precise location is Santa Rosa, California, USA:

https://wayback-usw2.maptiles.arcgis.com/arcgis/rest/services/World_Imagery/MapServer/tile/18820/22/1611358/667371

Question is: how do we store this information in the wiki? I suggest a new attribute, something like <test-max-zoom-location>38.438631,-122.719048<test-max-zoom-location>

We could also add a <test-no-tile-location> to test the validity of <no-tile-header>.

Comments?

Last edited 4 months ago by Don-vip (previous) (diff)

comment:28 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14512/josm:

see #16073 - improve test

comment:29 Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

Don't get too sophisticated. A general availability check should be enough.

comment:30 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

OK we can keep this for later. I'll check at a lower zoom.

comment:31 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14513/josm:

see #16073 - rework/simplify max zoom test

comment:32 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14514/josm:

see #16073 - messed up parameters order

comment:33 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14515/josm:

see #16073 - use Greenwich instead of (0,0) for global sources

comment:34 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14516/josm:

see #16073 - ignore check when max-zoom not defined (344 entries)

comment:35 Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

According to AbstractTileSourceLayer the default Max-Zoom we use is 20. You could use that for tests, so that we can fix these which have 18 only.

comment:36 Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

Or you use the function of the tile layer to get the MaxZoom, which takes the default into account :-)

comment:37 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14519/josm:

see #16073 - handle entries with several shapes (like French 'BDOrtho IGN')

comment:38 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14521/josm:

see #16073 - handle entries where centroid does not lie in shape (like Canadian 'British Columbia Mosaic')

comment:39 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14522/josm:

see #16073 - add robustness

comment:40 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14523/josm:

see #16073 - make sure correct projection is used

comment:41 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14524/josm:

see #16073 - fix NPE

comment:42 Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

Drop SPOT in sources as well: [o34776].

comment:43 Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

How do we want to handle known invalid entries like the TLS problems? Add an Ignore list to ImageryCompareIgnores in some form? Maybe a second table?

comment:44 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14526/josm:

see #16073 - increase timeouts, don't test max-zoom for scanex

comment:45 in reply to:  42 ; Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

Replying to stoecker:

Drop SPOT in sources as well: [o34776].

Fixed in [o34777]. You should use an IDE to spot compile errors :p

Replying to stoecker:

How do we want to handle known invalid entries like the TLS problems? Add an Ignore list to ImageryCompareIgnores in some form?

A separate page with the same idea sounds good.

comment:46 in reply to:  45 Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

Replying to Don-vip:

Replying to stoecker:

Drop SPOT in sources as well: [o34776].

Fixed in [o34777]. You should use an IDE to spot compile errors :p

Compiling also for simple fixes would be enough as well. ;-)

How do we want to handle known invalid entries like the TLS problems? Add an Ignore list to ImageryCompareIgnores in some form?

A separate page with the same idea sounds good.

Why separate? ImageryCompare already handles a lot of other non-remote validity checks. Keeping that in one place is not strange I'd say.

comment:47 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

The point of this test is not to compare with ELI but check the validity of our own sources. I have other tests like this (validity of our plugins, presets, validator rules, etc.) that also fail quite often and could benefit from a common page like IntegrationTestIgnores. Right now I exclude some presets directly in the Java source code, it's not ideal.

Also the TLS stuff from example has nothing to do with ELI: from a web browser, it works. It only concerns Java.

comment:48 in reply to:  47 ; Changed 4 months ago by stoecker

Replying to Don-vip:

The point of this test is not to compare with ELI but check the validity of our own sources.

I know. Nevertheless ImageryCompare actually is an ImageryCompareAndCheckValidity test already. A lot of that stuff has nothing to do with ELI as well. It was only a place where these checks could be added without duplicating a lot of effort.

I have other tests like this (validity of our plugins, presets, validator rules, etc.) that also fail quite often and could benefit from a common page like IntegrationTestIgnores. Right now I exclude some presets directly in the Java source code, it's not ideal.

A generic page for all integration tests is not a bad idea. Format could be similar to the ignores page, but adding a integration test name as first column.

comment:49 in reply to:  48 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

Replying to stoecker:

Format could be similar to the ignores page, but adding a integration test name as first column.

That's what I had in mind :)

comment:50 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14527/josm:

see #16073 - fix timeouts

comment:51 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14528/josm:

see #16073 - handle ignore list

comment:52 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14529/josm:

see #16073 - increase timeout

comment:53 Changed 4 months ago by Don-vip

In 14530/josm:

see #16073 - better error message

comment:54 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14532/josm:

see #16073 - avoid spurious warnings

comment:55 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14533/josm:

see #16073 - use custom http headers when required

comment:56 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14535/josm:

see #16073 - check response contents
see #16854 - stability of created primitive IDs (accidental commit...)

comment:57 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14536/josm:

see #16073 - check response contents with correct cache

comment:58 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14538/josm:

see #16073 - avoid multiline error messages

comment:59 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14539/josm:

see #16073 - check response contents correctly

comment:60 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14544/josm:

see #16073 - don't log duplicate errors

comment:61 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14549/josm:

see #16073 - support WMS_ENDPOINT

comment:62 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14550/josm:

see #16073 - rework error handling

comment:63 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14551/josm:

see #16073 - detect correct min_zoom value

comment:64 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14553/josm:

see #16073 - avoid unnamed layers

comment:65 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14564/josm:

see #16073 - better detection of bad zoom errors

comment:66 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14565/josm:

see #16073 - detection of json errors

comment:67 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14566/josm:

see #16073 - double timeouts

comment:68 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14569/josm:

see #16073 - correct handling of server projections

comment:69 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14572/josm:

see #16073 - improve WMTS parsing

comment:70 Changed 3 months ago by stoecker

Hmm, when the big shape has 13, why do you set 14: Maps/Philippines

comment:71 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

For some reason the test is performed in the area where only zoom 14 is available.

comment:72 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

I've changed the order of shapes, should fix the issue.

comment:74 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

Ah, a mistake. Rolling back.

comment:75 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

I didn't know about this check. It should not depend on the order of shapes. My test always takes the first shape to check for tile validity:

* Different number of points for shape 1 (10 ! = 5)): [PH] Pangasinán/Bulacan (Philippines HiRes) - https://gravitystorm.dev.openstreetmap.org/imagery/philippines/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.png
* Different number of points for shape 2 (5 ! = 10)): [PH] Pangasinán/Bulacan (Philippines HiRes) - https://gravitystorm.dev.openstreetmap.org/imagery/philippines/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.png

comment:76 in reply to:  75 Changed 3 months ago by stoecker

Replying to Don-vip:

I didn't know about this check. It should not depend on the order of shapes. My test always takes the first shape to check for tile validity:

* Different number of points for shape 1 (10 ! = 5)): [PH] Pangasinán/Bulacan (Philippines HiRes) - https://gravitystorm.dev.openstreetmap.org/imagery/philippines/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.png
* Different number of points for shape 2 (5 ! = 10)): [PH] Pangasinán/Bulacan (Philippines HiRes) - https://gravitystorm.dev.openstreetmap.org/imagery/philippines/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.png

Hmm, then the sync script needs to handle that situation...

comment:77 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

I guess the script can sort the shapes itself before comparing them?

comment:78 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

Other possibility would be to allow min-zoom/max-zoom elements in shapes, not only in entries.

comment:79 in reply to:  77 Changed 3 months ago by stoecker

Replying to Don-vip:

I guess the script can sort the shapes itself before comparing them?

It could, but we need to keep original position for the output or users are confused.

Other possibility would be to allow min-zoom/max-zoom elements in shapes, not only in entries.

No. That's useless complexity. For the tests we could add an "test-position" field to choose a defined position for tests in these cases where automatics will fail. Or we simply catch that with the ignores page (probably the easiest and best solution).

comment:80 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

I don't like ignoring the issue in this case, this means we ignore completely to check a server working correctly.

After more thoughts I can simply check each shape. The test will last longer but after all that's the only way to be sure the geometry is (almost) correct. Thus I won't need to change the XML (which is good)

comment:81 Changed 3 months ago by stoecker

Whoah 261 Ignores on the page already for fixes you did. This test really was necessary...

comment:82 Changed 3 months ago by stoecker

In 14576/josm:

do not complain about order of polygons, see #16073

comment:83 in reply to:  81 ; Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

Replying to stoecker:

Whoah 261 Ignores on the page already for fixes you did. This test really was necessary...

Indeed. Almost finished :) We will really have a nice database now!

comment:84 in reply to:  83 ; Changed 3 months ago by stoecker

Indeed. Almost finished :) We will really have a nice database now!

Dream on 😁 What do you think I thought when I added many sanity checks in the sync script and fixed the related errors in our database...

comment:85 Changed 3 months ago by stoecker

The test should at the end output unused ignores, so that we have a chance from time to time to get rid of old ones.

comment:86 in reply to:  84 ; Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

Resolution: fixed
Status: newclosed

Replying to stoecker:

Dream on 😁 What do you think I thought when I added many sanity checks in the sync script and fixed the related errors in our database...

I'm sure it was far worse back then :)

Replying to stoecker:

The test should at the end output unused ignores, so that we have a chance from time to time to get rid of old ones.

Problem is that many ignores won't trigger because I duplicated error messages for switches. During the next few weeks I'll check links directly from IntegrationTestIgnores.

comment:87 in reply to:  86 Changed 3 months ago by stoecker

The test should at the end output unused ignores, so that we have a chance from time to time to get rid of old ones.

Problem is that many ignores won't trigger because I duplicated error messages for switches. During the next few weeks I'll check links directly from IntegrationTestIgnores.

Don't make them an error like for sync script, but output nevertheless.

For duplicated error message you may find a way to de-duplicate the message, e.g. additionally allow RegExp syntax ignores?

comment:88 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14605/josm:

see #16073 - convert single global test to one test per imagery entry

Slower, but this improves readbility and allows to focus on entries failing for several consecutive tries.

comment:89 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14606/josm:

see #16073 - handle locale-dependent error messages such as XML parsing errors

comment:90 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14611/josm:

see #16073 - increase read timeout for slow WMS servers

comment:91 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14612/josm:

see #16073 - mark ignored tests as skipped

comment:92 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

In 14614/josm:

see #16073 - increase read timeout for slow WMS servers

comment:93 Changed 3 months ago by stoecker

In 14616/josm:

see #16073 - output skipped ignores at the end

comment:94 Changed 3 months ago by stoecker

2018-12-30 13:19:31.731 WARNING: Ignore line unused: http://wms.ign.gob.ar:80/geoserver/ows?SERVICE=WMS&FORMAT=image/png&TRANSPARENT=TRUE&VERSION=1.1.1&SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=topografico:area_de_limites&STYLES=&SRS=EPSG:3857&WIDTH=512&HEIGHT=512&BBOX=-20037508.3427892,-20037506.6204108,20037506.6204108,20037508.3427892 -> zoom 1 -> Could not find layer topografico:area_de_limites
2018-12-30 13:19:31.731 WARNING: Ignore line unused: http://wms.ign.gob.ar:80/geoserver/ows?SERVICE=WMS&FORMAT=image/png&TRANSPARENT=TRUE&VERSION=1.1.1&SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=topografico:area_de_limites&STYLES=&SRS=EPSG:3857&WIDTH=512&HEIGHT=512&BBOX=-7083572.8419892,-4696289.9548108,-7064004.9635892,-4676722.0764108 -> zoom 12 -> Could not find layer topografico:area_de_limites

Where do these two come from? That ":80" looks strange to me.

comment:95 in reply to:  94 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

Replying to stoecker:

Where do these two come from? That ":80" looks strange to me.

Maps/Argentina's ign-wms entry is a WMS endpoint. The test checks the first layer defined in capabilities, which is:

<Layer queryable="1" opaque="0">
 <Name>topografico:area_de_limites</Name>
 <Title>Area de Límites</Title>
 <Abstract/>
 <KeywordList><Keyword>features</Keyword><Keyword>area_de_limites</Keyword></KeywordList>
 <CRS>EPSG:4326</CRS>
 <CRS>CRS:84</CRS>
 <EX_GeographicBoundingBox>
  <westBoundLongitude>-181.800003051758</westBoundLongitude>
  <eastBoundLongitude>181.800018310547</eastBoundLongitude>
  <southBoundLatitude>-90.8538589477539</southBoundLatitude>
  <northBoundLatitude>81.6239395141602</northBoundLatitude>
 </EX_GeographicBoundingBox>
 <BoundingBox CRS="CRS:84" minx="-181.800003051758" miny="-90.8538589477539" maxx="181.800018310547" maxy="81.6239395141602"/>
 <BoundingBox CRS="EPSG:4326" minx="-90.8538589477539" miny="-181.800003051758" maxx="81.6239395141602" maxy="181.800018310547"/>
 <Style>
  <Name>generic</Name>
  <Title>Generic</Title>
  <Abstract>Generic style</Abstract>
  <LegendURL width="20" height="20">
  <Format>image/png</Format>
  <OnlineResource xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="http://wms.ign.gob.ar:80/geoserver/ows?service=WMS&request=GetLegendGraphic&format=image%2Fpng&width=20&height=20&layer=topografico%3Aarea_de_limites"/>
  </LegendURL>
 </Style>
</Layer>

comment:96 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

Are you sure your code works? The test has been ignored as expected:

Skip Message

{AR={ImageryInfo{name='National Geographic Institute (WMS)', countryCode='AR', url='https://wms.ign.gob.ar/geoserver/ows?service=wms&version=1.3.0&request=GetCapabilities', imageryType=WMS_ENDPOINT}=
[
http://wms.ign.gob.ar:80/geoserver/ows?SERVICE=WMS&FORMAT=image/png&TRANSPARENT=TRUE&VERSION=1.1.1&SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=topografico:area_de_limites&STYLES=&SRS=EPSG:3857&WIDTH=512&HEIGHT=512&BBOX=-20037508.3427892,-20037506.6204108,20037506.6204108,20037508.3427892 -> zoom 1 -> Could not find layer topografico:area_de_limites
, 
http://wms.ign.gob.ar:80/geoserver/ows?SERVICE=WMS&FORMAT=image/png&TRANSPARENT=TRUE&VERSION=1.1.1&SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=topografico:area_de_limites&STYLES=&SRS=EPSG:3857&WIDTH=512&HEIGHT=512&BBOX=-7083572.8419892,-4696289.9548108,-7064004.9635892,-4676722.0764108 -> zoom 12 -> Could not find layer topografico:area_de_limites
]}

comment:97 in reply to:  96 Changed 3 months ago by stoecker

Replying to Don-vip:

Are you sure your code works? The test has been ignored as expected:

Hmm, that line came only on my local system. Very fragile some servers...

comment:98 Changed 3 months ago by Don-vip

IGN websites have been unreachable all day yesterday, maybe that's why you get this message.

comment:99 Changed 2 months ago by Don-vip

@stoecker I don't understand why this new entry is unreachable from JOSM server. It works fine from my machine but we get connect timeout errors from Jenkins.

https://ogrip.oit.ohio.gov/ProjectsInitiatives/StatewideImagery.aspx -> java.net.SocketTimeoutException: connect timed out
https://ogrip.oit.ohio.gov/Portals/0/PDFs/OSIP%20Program%20Description.pdf#page=2 -> java.net.SocketTimeoutException: connect timed out
https://geo.oit.ohio.gov/arcgis/services/OSIP/osip_best_avail_1ft/ImageServer/WMSServer?FORMAT=image/png&TRANSPARENT=TRUE&VERSION=1.1.1&SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=0&STYLES=&SRS=EPSG:4326&WIDTH=512&HEIGHT=512&BBOX=-180.0000000,-269.9999845,179.9999845,90.0000000 -> java.net.SocketTimeoutException: connect timed out
https://geo.oit.ohio.gov/arcgis/services/OSIP/osip_best_avail_1ft/ImageServer/WMSServer?FORMAT=image/png&TRANSPARENT=TRUE&VERSION=1.1.1&SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=0&STYLES=&SRS=EPSG:4326&WIDTH=512&HEIGHT=512&BBOX=-82.7929729,40.0781271,-82.6171917,40.2539084 -> java.net.SocketTimeoutException: connect timed out
    <entry>
        <name>Ohio Statewide Imagery Program</name>
        <id>Ohio_OSIP_1ft</id>
        <category>photo</category>
        <date>2011;2014</date>
        <country-code>US</country-code>
        <type>wms</type>
        <url><![CDATA[https://geo.oit.ohio.gov/arcgis/services/OSIP/osip_best_avail_1ft/ImageServer/WMSServer?FORMAT=image/png&TRANSPARENT=TRUE&VERSION=1.1.1&SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=0&STYLES=&SRS={proj}&WIDTH={width}&HEIGHT={height}&BBOX={bbox}]]></url>
        <min-zoom>1</min-zoom>
        <max-zoom>20</max-zoom>
        <projections>
            <code>EPSG:4326</code>
        </projections>
        <attribution-text>Ohio Statewide Imagery Program</attribution-text>
        <attribution-url>https://ogrip.oit.ohio.gov/ProjectsInitiatives/StatewideImagery.aspx</attribution-url>
        <permission-ref><![CDATA[https://ogrip.oit.ohio.gov/Portals/0/PDFs/OSIP%20Program%20Description.pdf#page=2]]></permission-ref>
        <bounds min-lat='38.3974528' min-lon='-84.8447141' max-lat='41.9993921' max-lon='-80.5016116'/>
    </entry>
Last edited 2 months ago by Don-vip (previous) (diff)

comment:100 in reply to:  99 ; Changed 2 months ago by stoecker

Replying to Don-vip:

@stoecker I don't understand why this new entry is unreachable from JOSM server. It works fine from my machine but we get connect timeout errors from Jenkins.

I'd simply say they block the IP. I tried serveral other servers from Hetzner and had no success. So they probably block the whole Hetzner IP range or even more. Overblocking is a common behaviour for US services.

comment:101 in reply to:  100 Changed 2 months ago by Don-vip

Replying to stoecker:

I'd simply say they block the IP. I tried serveral other servers from Hetzner and had no success. So they probably block the whole Hetzner IP range or even more. Overblocking is a common behaviour for US services.

OK I've sent them an e-mail.

comment:102 Changed 2 months ago by Don-vip

In 14694/josm:

see #16073 - allow to ignore error only based on its last part

comment:103 Changed 5 weeks ago by Don-vip

In 14789/josm:

see #16073 - allow to ignore error only based on a substring

Modify Ticket

Change Properties
Set your email in Preferences
Action
as closed The owner will remain team.
as The resolution will be set.
The resolution will be deleted.

Add Comment


E-mail address and name can be saved in the Preferences.

 
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.