Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] netaddr and abbreviated CIDR format
On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 10:10:39AM EDT, Kevin Benton wrote: While waiting for the upstream netaddr feedback, we should be able to block this pretty easily on the Neutron side by just checking that str(netaddr.IPNetwork(input)) == input. Good call - I totally missed the easy way to fix. -- Sean M. Collins __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] netaddr and abbreviated CIDR format
While waiting for the upstream netaddr feedback, we should be able to block this pretty easily on the Neutron side by just checking that str(netaddr.IPNetwork(input)) == input. On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Sean M. Collins s...@coreitpro.com wrote: On August 22, 2015 11:58:03 AM EDT, Monty Taylor mord...@inaugust.com wrote: On 08/21/2015 03:33 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 08/21/2015 02:34 PM, Sean M. Collins wrote: So - the tl;dr is that I don't think that we should accept inputs like the following: x - 192 x/y - 10/8 x.x/y - 192.168/16 x.x.x/y - 192.168.0/24 which are equivalent to:: x.0.0.0/y - 192.0.0.0/24 x.0.0.0/y - 10.0.0.0/8 x.x.0.0/y - 192.168.0.0/16 x.x.x.0/y - 192.168.0.0/24 Agreed completely. ++ -- OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev I've got a proof of concept patch for netaddr, I'll be reaching out to the netaddr devs and use it to spur discussion. https://github.com/sc68cal/netaddr/commit/7ccbfe40fe6be66228601977ded74781cf5cffd9 -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Kevin Benton __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] netaddr and abbreviated CIDR format
there was another patch [1] fix the invalid CIDR for subnet. thanks, hanzhang, shi [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/201942/ At 2015-08-22 03:33:26, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On 08/21/2015 02:34 PM, Sean M. Collins wrote: So - the tl;dr is that I don't think that we should accept inputs like the following: x - 192 x/y - 10/8 x.x/y - 192.168/16 x.x.x/y - 192.168.0/24 which are equivalent to:: x.0.0.0/y - 192.0.0.0/24 x.0.0.0/y - 10.0.0.0/8 x.x.0.0/y - 192.168.0.0/16 x.x.x.0/y - 192.168.0.0/24 Agreed completely. Best, -jay __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] netaddr and abbreviated CIDR format
On August 22, 2015 11:58:03 AM EDT, Monty Taylor mord...@inaugust.com wrote: On 08/21/2015 03:33 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 08/21/2015 02:34 PM, Sean M. Collins wrote: So - the tl;dr is that I don't think that we should accept inputs like the following: x - 192 x/y - 10/8 x.x/y - 192.168/16 x.x.x/y - 192.168.0/24 which are equivalent to:: x.0.0.0/y - 192.0.0.0/24 x.0.0.0/y - 10.0.0.0/8 x.x.0.0/y - 192.168.0.0/16 x.x.x.0/y - 192.168.0.0/24 Agreed completely. ++ __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev I've got a proof of concept patch for netaddr, I'll be reaching out to the netaddr devs and use it to spur discussion. https://github.com/sc68cal/netaddr/commit/7ccbfe40fe6be66228601977ded74781cf5cffd9 -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.__ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] netaddr and abbreviated CIDR format
On 08/21/2015 03:33 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 08/21/2015 02:34 PM, Sean M. Collins wrote: So - the tl;dr is that I don't think that we should accept inputs like the following: x - 192 x/y - 10/8 x.x/y - 192.168/16 x.x.x/y - 192.168.0/24 which are equivalent to:: x.0.0.0/y - 192.0.0.0/24 x.0.0.0/y - 10.0.0.0/8 x.x.0.0/y - 192.168.0.0/16 x.x.x.0/y - 192.168.0.0/24 Agreed completely. ++ __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] netaddr and abbreviated CIDR format
On 08/21/2015 02:34 PM, Sean M. Collins wrote: So - the tl;dr is that I don't think that we should accept inputs like the following: x - 192 x/y - 10/8 x.x/y - 192.168/16 x.x.x/y - 192.168.0/24 which are equivalent to:: x.0.0.0/y - 192.0.0.0/24 x.0.0.0/y - 10.0.0.0/8 x.x.0.0/y - 192.168.0.0/16 x.x.x.0/y - 192.168.0.0/24 Agreed completely. Best, -jay __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [Neutron] netaddr and abbreviated CIDR format
[Resending - since I don't think my mail client actually sent this the first time] While reviewing https://review.openstack.org/#/c/204459/ - I noticed that one of the unit tests is passing an IP address 1/32 - so I went and looked up the constructor for netaddr.IPNetwork, which has a feature that expands a string into a prefix. http://pythonhosted.org//netaddr/api.html?highlight=abbreviated%20cidr#ip-networks-and-subnets Putting it into my REPL: http://paste.openstack.org/show/421041/ So - is this an actual IP address? I could be horribly wrong, but it doesn't look like one to me - especially since built in tools like ping don't appear to like it. scollins@Sean-Collins-MBPr15 ~ » ping 1/32 ping: cannot resolve 1/32: Unknown host Although, ping has it's own interesting behavior. scollins@Sean-Collins-MBPr15 ~ » ping 1 68 ↵ PING 1 (0.0.0.1): 56 data bytes ping: sendto: No route to host ping: sendto: No route to host Request timeout for icmp_seq 0 ^C --- 1 ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0% packet loss scollins@Sean-Collins-MBPr15 ~ » ping 60 2 ↵ PING 60 (0.0.0.60): 56 data bytes ping: sendto: No route to host ping: sendto: No route to host Request timeout for icmp_seq 0 ^C --- 60 ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0% packet loss Oh, also spelunking through the code of Netaddr, it looks like this option is going to be deprecated? https://github.com/drkjam/netaddr/blob/bfba0b80c2e88b6e00ca7a870998b630d7c29734/netaddr/ip/__init__.py#L776 Which calls into: https://github.com/drkjam/netaddr/blob/bfba0b80c2e88b6e00ca7a870998b630d7c29734/netaddr/ip/__init__.py#L1438 So - the tl;dr is that I don't think that we should accept inputs like the following: x - 192 x/y - 10/8 x.x/y - 192.168/16 x.x.x/y - 192.168.0/24 which are equivalent to:: x.0.0.0/y - 192.0.0.0/24 x.0.0.0/y - 10.0.0.0/8 x.x.0.0/y - 192.168.0.0/16 x.x.x.0/y - 192.168.0.0/24 -- Sean M. Collins __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] netaddr and abbreviated CIDR format
Here's what the implicit_prefix arg for the IPNetwork constructor does.
Python 2.7.6 (default, Sep 9 2014, 15:04:36)
[GCC 4.2.1 Compatible Apple LLVM 6.0 (clang-600.0.39)] on darwin
Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information.
import netaddr
a = netaddr.IPNetwork(1, implicit_prefix=True)
a
IPNetwork('1.0.0.0/8')
a = netaddr.IPNetwork(1, implicit_prefix=False)
a
IPNetwork('1.0.0.0/32')
--
Sean M. Collins
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
