netdev - Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 10611] New: Incorrect RFC section reference in comment

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20080506233351.1fe19fe6.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 6 May 2008 23:33:51 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	jdassen@...ian.org
Cc:	bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 10611] New: Incorrect RFC section reference in
 comment

(switched to email.  Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
bugzilla web interface).

On Tue,  6 May 2008 23:25:14 -0700 (PDT) bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org wrote:

> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10611
> 
>            Summary: Incorrect RFC section reference in comment
>            Product: Networking
>            Version: 2.5
>      KernelVersion: master branch
>           Platform: All
>         OS/Version: Linux
>               Tree: Mainline
>             Status: NEW
>           Severity: normal
>           Priority: P1
>          Component: IPV4
>         AssignedTo: shemminger@...ux-foundation.org
>         ReportedBy: jdassen@...ian.org
> 
> 
> Problem Description:
> 
> RFC 1122 does not have a section 3.1.2.2. The requirement to silently
> discard packets with a bad checksum is in section 3.2.1.2 instead.
> 
> Proposed patch:
> 
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/ip_input.c b/net/ipv4/ip_input.c
> index 212734c..5bdb8f4 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/ip_input.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/ip_input.c
> @@ -394,7 +394,7 @@ int ip_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev,
> struct packet_type *pt,
>         iph = skb->nh.iph;
> 
>         /*
> -        *      RFC1122: 3.1.2.2 MUST silently discard any IP frame that fails
> the checksum.
> +        *      RFC1122: 3.2.1.2 MUST silently discard any IP frame that fails
> the checksum.
>          *
>          *      Is the datagram acceptable?
>          *
> 
> 

Thanks, but we much prefer that patches be handled via email.  Can you
please resend the patch as a reply-to-all to this email, along with a
signed-off-by: as per Documentation/SubmittingPatches?
--
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