PaulRegardsThe following seems to fix the problem without adding too much bloat:Haproxy still complains about invalid networks.Hi Rich,Unfortunately this is not the complete fix.
--- a/musl/src/network/inet_pton.c
+++ b/musl/src/network/inet_pton.c
@@ -14,11 +14,11 @@
return -1;
}
-int inet_pton(int af, const char *restrict s, void *restrict a0)
+int inet_pton(int af, const char *restrict s0, void *restrict a0)
{
uint16_t ip[8];
unsigned char *a = a0;
- const char *z;
+ const char *z,*s = s0;
unsigned long x;
int i, j, v, d, brk=-1, need_v4=0;
@@ -73,6 +73,10 @@
*a++ = ip[j]>>8;
*a++ = ip[j];
}
+
+ /* There must have been valid IPv6 preceding IPv4 dotted-quad */
+ if (s==s0) return 0;
+
if (need_v4 && inet_pton(AF_INET, (void *)s, a-4) <= 0) return 0;
return 1;
}On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Paul Schutte <sjpschutte@gmail.com> wrote:
PaulThey pass in either a valid IPv4 or IPv6 address and then rely on this function to determine which they have (assuming a return value of 0).Hi Rich,I agree with you, especially about the bloat part.They (haproxy) actually use this function to determine whether the address they have is a valid IPv6 address.
After reading the spec more carefully I realise that -1 should be returned only when the address family is not AF_INET or AF_INET6.
By changing the return value in the IPv6 code to 0 instead of -1, we could get the correct behaviour without any extra code.Here is a patch to try and save you a bit of work:Regards
--- a/musl/src/network/inet_pton.c
+++ b/musl/src/network/inet_pton.c
@@ -46,24 +46,24 @@
if (!s[1]) break;
continue;
}
- if (hexval(s[0])<0) return -1;
+ if (hexval(s[0])<0) return 0;
while (s[0]=='0' && s[1]=='0') s++;
for (v=j=0; j<5 && (d=hexval(s[j]))>=0; j++)
v=16*v+d;
- if (v > 65535) return -1;
+ if (v > 65535) return 0;
ip[i] = v;
if (!s[j]) {
- if (brk<0 && i!=7) return -1;
+ if (brk<0 && i!=7) return 0;
break;
}
if (i<7) {
if (s[j]==':') continue;
- if (s[j]!='.') return -1;
+ if (s[j]!='.') return 0;
need_v4=1;
i++;
break;
}
- return -1;
+ return 0;
}
if (brk>=0) {
memmove(ip+brk+7-i, ip+brk, 2*(i+1-brk));
@@ -73,6 +73,6 @@
*a++ = ip[j]>>8;
*a++ = ip[j];
}
- if (need_v4 &&inet_pton(AF_INET, (void *)s, a-4) <= 0) return -1;
+ if (need_v4 &&inet_pton(AF_INET, (void *)s, a-4) <= 0) return 0;
return 1;
}
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 4:22 AM, Rich Felker <dalias@aerifal.cx> wrote:On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 10:57:00PM +0200, Paul Schutte wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I came across this and believe it is a bug.
>
> I have found that when you set str to an IPv4 addr of the from
> "xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx' while the address family is AF_INET6, then instead of
> returning a 0 to indicate an invalid IPv6 string, it is converted to
> gibberish.
From what I can tell, it's not converted to gibberish; instead, it's
wrongly returning an error (-1) instead of a result indicating an
invalid input string (0). One could argue that it's a programming
error not to check this, but inet_pton should not have any reason to
return -1 if the first argument (af) is valid, so one could also argue
that such checks would be extraneous bloat.
> inet_pton(AF_INET6, "192.168.1.1', &sa) should return 0 if I understand the
> specification correctly.
Agreed.
Rich