netdev - Re: Error: an inet prefix is expected rather than "0/0".

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]

Date:	Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:39:50 -0700
From:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To:	Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
Cc:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	Krzysztof Oledzki <ole@....pl>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Error: an inet prefix is expected rather than "0/0".

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 20:52:47 +0200
Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl> wrote:

> Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com> writes:
> 
> > It's a Berkeley extension which spread via BSD and its inet_aton()
> > function.  I don't believe it's specified in any RFC.
> 
> You may be right, I won't start searching now :-)
> Anyway it was like that for years and I guess we shouldn't change it
> (except perhaps for removing).
> 
> > No, a single number is treated by inet_aton() as a 32-bit address, so 10
> > is equivalent to 0.0.0.10.
> 
> Hmm, I remember some routes being used without a dot, as a single
> number, but OTOH you're right, it was also possible to ping
> 12345678. Perhaps 10 -> 10.0 was specific to something rather than
> used generally, I don't know.

I ended up putting in a version similar to the original code but with
more error checking so it would not accept 259.1 etc.
--
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