Just found another gotya. From the linux page: If service is NULL [which it is], then the port number of the returned socket addresses will be left uninitialized. so it might be prudent to have the sockaddr_to_address_port() function accept and ignore the port when it is NULL. (posix says a "network-level address" is returned, which might be secret code for don't read the port)
On Tue, 4 May 2021 at 12:50, Andrew Cagney <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Tue, 4 May 2021 at 07:47, Andrew Cagney <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Looking at the results that came in overnight >> https://testing.libreswan.org/ >> The core seems to be fixed. However, the results are still taking a >> sizable hit; how does that compare to your local results? >> > > It looks like there's more than one challenge here: > > -> +whack error: IPv4 address must be exactly 4 bytes "192.1.3.209" > > err = data_to_address(res->ai_addr, res->ai_addrlen, > aftoinfo(res->ai_family), dst); > In theory something like: > ip_sockaddr sa = { .sa,sa = *res->ai_addr, .len = res->ai_addrlen, }; > sockaddr_to_address_port(&sa); > except I've my doubts that res->ai_addr is pointing to the full > ip_sockaddr (it could be shorter for instance). So I'd guess: > ip_sockaddr sa = { .len = res->sa_addrlen, }; > passert(res->sa_addrlen < sizeof(sa.sa)) > memcpy(&sa.sa, res->ai_addr, res->sa_addrlen); > ... > or expose an alternative interface > > -> -000 "named": failed to convert 'right.libreswan.org' at load time: not a > numeric IPv4 address and name lookup failed (no validation performed) > -> +000 "named": failed to convert 'right.libreswan.org' at load time: Name > or service not known > > I'm not sure if we want to expose linux's idea of errors; if nothing else > it will churn output > > -> > https://testing.libreswan.org/v4.4-79-g1dad494d64-main/ikev2-x509-07-san-ip-mismatch/OUTPUT/west.console.diff > this has me stumped; I guess a bad ip fed in somewhere and the connection > should have been dropped instead of loaded?!?! > > > Any ideas on fixing that function's portability? >> > > Here's one thought. > > Since POSIX doesn't specify the list's order, what about scanning the list > looking for something we like. At least for when the family wasn't > specified? > > >> On Tue, 4 May 2021 at 00:23, D. Hugh Redelmeier <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> | From: Andrew Cagney <[email protected]> >>> >>> | FYI, >>> | >>> https://testing.libreswan.org/v4.4-73-g379929c054-main/ikev2-ddns-03/OUTPUT/west.console.diff >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> Could you see if my latest commit fixes the problem. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Swan-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.libreswan.org/mailman/listinfo/swan-dev >>> >>
_______________________________________________ Swan-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libreswan.org/mailman/listinfo/swan-dev
