Vlad Yasevich writes:
> Ok. First, this is a different bug, so I would prefer a separate patch.
> Also, I see the problem and it's ugly, but this solution is not really correct,
> both conceptually and code wise.
>
> Conceptually, the v4 code should never worry about V4-mapped addresses and shouldn't
> muck with them. They are IPv6 addresses and there should be a clean separation.
>
> Code wise, the code in the __sctp_connect() is terrible.
>
> Does the attached patch work for you in this case.
yes, with the v4mapped in ipv6.c and your patch, connect and accept
both work with v4 mapped addresses.
Note instead of:
> + af = sctp_get_af_specific(sa_addr->sa.sa_family);
> + af->to_sk_daddr(sa_addr, sk);
you should have:
> + af = sctp_get_af_specific(sa_addr->sa_family);
> + af->to_sk_daddr((union sctp_addr *)sa_addr, sk);
--
Dave Johnson
Starent Networks
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
