Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 11:28:52 +0900 From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp> To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Ed Maste <emaste@phaedrus.sandvine.ca>, Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: inet_pton and oddly-formatted addresses Message-ID: <y7vmz4dm7tn.wl%jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp> In-Reply-To: <20070120214052.U82671@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <20070120192807.GA1326@sandvine.com> <yged559v3y8.wl%ume@mahoroba.org> <20070120214052.U82671@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 21:42:44 +0000 (UTC), >>>>> "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> said: emaste> I think an address like 1.002.3.4 is bizarre, but is our inet_pton incorrect emaste> in rejecting it? >> >> The change was taken from BIND9. The following is from BIND9's >> CHANGES: >> >> 935. [bug] inet_pton failed to reject leading zeros. > well, maybe they were wrong? How does one get in contact with their > bugs database these days? Is comp.protocols.dns.bind still a good > place to discuss these things? Or bind-users@isc.org. And yes, I'd ask the question at some BIND-specific list. JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp p.s. 1.002.3.4 is "illegal" according to RFC3986, Section 3.2.2 (although it's specified in the context of a URI), so "what is legal" is probably a controversial issue.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?y7vmz4dm7tn.wl%jinmei>