From owner-freebsd-bugs  Wed Sep  8 23:45:35 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org
Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 10A36159A7; Wed,  8 Sep 1999 23:45:28 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net)
Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218])
	by ns1.yes.no (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA05933;
	Thu, 9 Sep 1999 08:45:49 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (from eivind@localhost)
	by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id IAA20229;
	Thu, 9 Sep 1999 08:45:22 +0200 (MET DST)
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 08:45:22 +0200
From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@FreeBSD.org>
To: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org>
Cc: ru@FreeBSD.org, joelh@gnu.org, freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: bin/7669: libalias does not IRC DCC packets under certain conditions
Message-ID: <19990909084522.R6332@bitbox.follo.net>
References: <199909081659.JAA94740@freefall.freebsd.org> <199909082346.AAA06689@keep.lan.Awfulhak.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i
In-Reply-To: <199909082346.AAA06689@keep.lan.Awfulhak.org>; from Brian Somers on Thu, Sep 09, 1999 at 12:46:03AM +0100
Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

On Thu, Sep 09, 1999 at 12:46:03AM +0100, Brian Somers wrote:
> > Synopsis: libalias does not IRC DCC packets under certain conditions
> > 
> > State-Changed-From-To: open->suspended
> > State-Changed-By: ru
> > State-Changed-When: Wed Sep 8 09:59:03 PDT 1999
> > State-Changed-Why: 
> > Awaiting IRC guru.
> 
> I fired the attached patch at Eivind (cc'd), but he pooh-pooh'd it 
> for a reason I forget (I know nothing about IRC).
> 
> Eivind, have you any advances on this ?

The patch changes the behaviour from being correct according to the
standards and working with 90% of the cases, to being incorrect
according to the standard and definately working with the remaining
10%, but possibly hurting the 90%.  The 10% with error has configured
their IRC client to use server extensions to get "their own IP", as
opposed to using the IP they are actually binding their recieve socket
to.

My previous stance on this was "client configuration bug - fix in that
end", but thinking a bit more about it, I believe it will only hurt a
miniscule fraction the 90% (perhaps none of them, though that would be
pure luck), and thus would be an overall win.  Feel free to apply - we
are more likely to hear from people we might break than from people
that don't get it to work from the start, so it is a worthwhile
experiment.

(I have nothing approaching an easy way of testing the patch beyond
compilation, since I don't use NAT for any of my own boxes anymore).

Eivind.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message