netdev - RE: [PATCH 02/05] ipv6: RFC4214 Support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A1029EDBF9@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com>
Date:	Wed, 7 Nov 2007 11:32:49 -0800
From:	"Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@...ing.com>
To:	"Simon Arlott" <simon@...e.lp0.eu>
Cc:	YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 
	<yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>, <netdev@...eo.de>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 02/05] ipv6: RFC4214 Support

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Arlott [mailto:simon@...e.lp0.eu] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:02 AM
> To: Templin, Fred L
> Cc: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明; netdev@...eo.de; netdev@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/05] ipv6: RFC4214 Support
> 
> On 07/11/07 18:52, Templin, Fred L wrote:
> >> > > > > +	eui[0] = 0;
> >> > > > > +
> >> > > > > +	/* Check for RFC3330 global address ranges */
> >> > > > > +	if (((ipv4 >= 0x01000000) && (ipv4 < 0x0a000000)) ||
> >> > > > > +	    ((ipv4 >= 0x0b000000) && (ipv4 < 0x7f000000)) ||
> >> > > > > +	    ((ipv4 >= 0x80000000) && (ipv4 < 0xa9fe0000)) ||
> >> > > > > +	    ((ipv4 >= 0xa9ff0000) && (ipv4 < 0xac100000)) ||
> >> > > > > +	    ((ipv4 >= 0xac200000) && (ipv4 < 0xc0a80000)) ||
> >> > > > > +	    ((ipv4 >= 0xc0a90000) && (ipv4 < 0xc6120000)) ||
> >> > > > > +	    ((ipv4 >= 0xc6140000) && (ipv4 < 
> >> 0xe0000000))) eui[0] |=
> >> > > > > 0x2;
> >> I don't understand.
> >> 
> >> For example, 1.0.0.11 is valid IPv4 global address.
> >> In little-endian, this is not in the range of
> >> 0x00000001 <= addr <= 0x0000000a (addr is 0x0b000001).
> > 
> > Maybe it is I who did not understand. Can you suggest a 
> clean solution?
> 
> ((ipv4 & htonl(0xFF000000)) == htonl(0x0A000000)) etc.?

I'm not sure this works when we consider disjoint ranges
of globally-unique IP prefixes. Do you have a vision for
how the entire conditional would look like?

Thanks - Fred
fred.l.templin@...ing.com

> Simon Arlott
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html