From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Mon Feb 6 17:04:48 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42D5FCD3D00 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 17:04:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vangyzen@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.vangyzen.net (hotblack.vangyzen.net [IPv6:2607:fc50:1000:7400:216:3eff:fe72:314f]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2363CC97 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 17:04:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vangyzen@FreeBSD.org) Received: from sweettea.beer.town (unknown [76.164.8.130]) by smtp.vangyzen.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 538E8564EE; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 11:04:47 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: net.inet.udp.log_in_vain strange syslog reports To: Mark Martinec References: <76681a24b7935674585b5ac585f4575c@ijs.si> <667fa3e1dd8e7cebbf4566467a7987bf@ijs.si> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org From: Eric van Gyzen Message-ID: <7dca33f9-e817-7d79-bddd-332e745a1c05@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 11:04:46 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <667fa3e1dd8e7cebbf4566467a7987bf@ijs.si> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 17:04:48 -0000 On 02/06/2017 10:19, Mark Martinec wrote: > > One minor nit: > instead of a hack: > > char src[4*sizeof "123"]; > char dst[4*sizeof "123"]; > > it would be cleaner and in sync with the equivalent code in > sys/netinet6/udp6_usrreq.c > to use the INET_ADDRSTRLEN constant (from sys/netinet/in.h, value 16): > > char src[INET_ADDRSTRLEN]; > char dst[INET_ADDRSTRLEN]; Agreed. > Hope the fix finds its way into 11.1 (or better yet, as a patch level in > 10.0). > Should I open a bug report? It will quite likely get into 11.1. As for a 10.x patch, you would have to ask re@ (I think), but I doubt it. These messages are really just informative and can't be used for any filtering, since the source address could be spoofed. Eric