From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 22 22:09:45 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8627352B; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 22:09:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org (mho-03-ewr.mailhop.org [204.13.248.66]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5ACE1215A; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 22:09:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from c-24-8-230-52.hsd1.co.comcast.net ([24.8.230.52] helo=damnhippie.dyndns.org) by mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Vjyv1-000L0J-Or; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 22:09:43 +0000 Received: from [172.22.42.240] (revolution.hippie.lan [172.22.42.240]) by damnhippie.dyndns.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id rAMM9bMw084230; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 15:09:37 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from ian@FreeBSD.org) X-Mail-Handler: Dyn Standard SMTP by Dyn X-Originating-IP: 24.8.230.52 X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/sendlabs/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX19iY4S/soVVRAjpUyhwwrSc Subject: Re: ipfw table add problem From: Ian Lepore To: Mark Andrews In-Reply-To: <20131122003538.8D5B8AB6EA6@rock.dv.isc.org> References: <1385045442.31172.549.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <20131122003538.8D5B8AB6EA6@rock.dv.isc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 15:09:37 -0700 Message-ID: <1385158177.31172.562.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-ipfw , Andreas Nilsson , Luigi Rizzo , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=D6zkan?= KIRIK , freebsd-stable X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.16 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 22:09:45 -0000 On Fri, 2013-11-22 at 11:35 +1100, Mark Andrews wrote: > In message <1385045442.31172.549.camel@revolution.hippie.lan>, Ian Lepore writes: > > On Tue, 2013-11-19 at 23:26 +0200, =D6zkan KIRIK wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Andreas Nilsson wro= > > te: > > > = > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 9:36 PM, =D6zkan KIRIK w= > > rote: > > > > > > > >> Hi, > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:22 PM, Andreas Nilsson = > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 8:55 PM, =D6zkan KIRIK > >wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> Hi, > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I'm using kernel FreeBSD 10.0-BETA3 #2 r257635 kernel. > > > >>>> I am trying to add port number to ipfw tables. But there is something > > > >>>> strange : > > > >>>> Problem is easily repeatable. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> #ipfw table 1 flush > > > >>>> #ipfw table 1 add 4899 > > > >>>> #ipfw table 1 list > > > >>>> ::/0 0 > > > >>>> > > > >>> Works with ipfw table 1 add 0 4899 > > > >>> > > > >> No, i want to use this table as port list ( to use with "lookup src-po= > > rt > > > >> 1" ) . If you add like this, you cannot match against ports. Am I wron= > > g? > > > >> > > > > No, that should be possible. > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >>>> #ipfw table 1 flush > > > >>>> #ipfw table 1 add 10.2.3.01 ( not 10.0.0.1, the last 1 has 0= > > as > > > >>>> prefix ) > > > >>>> #ipfw table 1 list > > > >>>> ::/0 0 > > > >>>> > > > >>> Did you mean ipfw table 1 add 10.2.3.0 1 ? That works for me. > > > >>> > > > >> Please dont leave spaces between 0 and 1. > > > >> > > > > Ok. any specific reason to type it as 10.2.3.01 instead 0f 10.2.3.1 ? > > > > > > > There is no specific reason, but both 10.2.3.01 and 10.2.3.1 are has true > > > syntax. > > > The problem is, ipfw doesnt throw any errors, but record added as > > > 0.0.0.0/0( all the IPv4 network ). This behaviour is really dangerous. > > > = > > > > > FreeBSD 8.2 and 8.4 doesnt have this problem. > > > > For this, I wonder if ipfw was recently changed from using inet_aton() > > to inet_pton() to parse addresses? Our implementation of inet_pton() > > does not match the manpage -- it's supposed to accept decimal, octal, or > > hex numbers for each of the dotted IP comonents, but it accepts decimal > > only. 10.2.3.01 appears to cause it to return 0 as the address. Our > > inet_aton() handles oct/dec/hex. > > The man page is wrong. > > RFC 3493 states inet_pton *only* takes dotted decimal. This was > the same in RFC 2553. The implementation Paul Vixie and I wrote > back in 199[89] for BIND only accepts dotted decimal with no leading > zeros. Actually, it was me that was wrong... the man page does mention the differences between inet_aton() and inet_pton(), I just didn't read all the way to the end. -- Ian