From owner-freebsd-current  Sun Mar 25 10:47:14 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from peter3.wemm.org (c1315225-a.plstn1.sfba.home.com [65.0.135.147])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 7C41837B719; Sun, 25 Mar 2001 10:47:11 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au)
Received: from mobile.wemm.org (mobile.wemm.org [10.0.0.5])
	by peter3.wemm.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f2PIlBp15550;
	Sun, 25 Mar 2001 10:47:11 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au)
Received: from netplex.com.au (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mobile.wemm.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2PIl9h13551;
	Sun, 25 Mar 2001 10:47:09 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au)
Message-Id: <200103251847.f2PIl9h13551@mobile.wemm.org>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4
To: obrien@FreeBSD.ORG
Cc: Valentin Nechayev <netch@iv.nn.kiev.ua>,
	freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, mb@imp.ch, alfred@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: /etc/exports: 192.168.5 = 192.168.0.5 
In-Reply-To: <20010325101710.C58992@dragon.nuxi.com> 
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 10:47:09 -0800
From: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

"David O'Brien" wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 04:08:47PM +0300, Valentin Nechayev wrote:
> > 192.168.5 should be interpreted as 192.168.0.5 in host address context,
> > but as 192.168.5.0 in network address context. (Such network address
> > context is well seen in sentences such as "10/8", "192.168/16".)
> 
> Where is this documented?

peter@daintree[10:39am]/tmp-162> cat foo.c
main()
{
        int x;

        x = inet_network("127.1");
        printf("inet_network(127.1) = %x\n", x);
        x = inet_addr("127.1");
        printf("inet_addr(127.1) = %x\n", htonl(x));
}
peter@daintree[10:39am]/tmp-163> cc -o foo foo.c
peter@daintree[10:40am]/tmp-164> ./foo
inet_network(127.1) = 7f01
inet_addr(127.1) = 7f000001

inet_addr() and family returns network order, while inet_network() returns
host order.

The old mountd code went to a lot of trouble to keep the two seperate.
In host context, it would have interpreted it as 192.168.0.5, but in network
/ netmask context it intentionally interpreted it as 192.168.5.0/mask.
See the old get_host() vs get_net() code.

Now that I have looked more closely, IMHO the new code is broken. :-(

Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au
"All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5


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