netdev - Re: [iproute PATCH] man: ip-route.8: Fix ENCAP references in synopsis

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 30 Nov 2018 18:27:36 +0100
From:   Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>
To:     Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
Cc:     Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [iproute PATCH] man: ip-route.8: Fix ENCAP references in synopsis

Hi Simon,

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:39:05PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 12:12:32PM +0100, Phil Sutter wrote:
> > The different encapsulation types are described in ENCAP_*
> > non-terminals, but ENCAP definition lists them without the ENCAP_
> > prefix. Fix this for consistency.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>
> > ---
> >  man/man8/ip-route.8.in | 3 ++-
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/man/man8/ip-route.8.in b/man/man8/ip-route.8.in
> > index 11dd4ca7abf68..26dfe0b06c86b 100644
> > --- a/man/man8/ip-route.8.in
> > +++ b/man/man8/ip-route.8.in
> > @@ -187,7 +187,8 @@ throw " | " unreachable " | " prohibit " | " blackhole " | " nat " ]"
> >  
> >  .ti -8
> >  .IR ENCAP " := [ "
> > -.IR MPLS " | " IP " | " BPF " | " SEG6 " | " SEG6LOCAL " ] "
> > +.IR ENCAP_MPLS " | " ENCAP_IP " | " ENCAP_BPF " | "
> > +.IR ENCAP_SEG6 " | " ENCAP_SEG6LOCAL " ] "
> >  
> >  .ti -8
> >  .IR ENCAP_MPLS " := "
> 
> This looks good but do we have another inconsistency with regards
> to ENCAP and ENCAPTYPE ENCAPHDR (further down).
> 
> Glancing over the file the following also seem inconsistent:
> 
> * NH / NEXTHOP
> * SCOPE / SCOPE_VAL

Well, strictly speaking yes. If I want to know more about NH listed in
synopsis I can't find it further down. Though its description in
'nexthop' is incomplete, as well.

My personal focus is that non-terminals in synopsis are defined in there
as well, otherwise I can't parse and the thrown exception is hard to
clean off my screen. ;)

My assumption (actually what *I* do) is to search for terminals in order
to get more info. For instance, I would search for 'nexthop' or 'encap'
not 'NH'.

I guess the broader question is about the scope of non-terminals in
synopsis and description sections - I don't necessarily consider them
related.

Of course feel free to fix what you don't like, I'll review and (N)ACK
if you put me in Cc. :)

Cheers, Phil