Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 11:12:06 -0400 From: Brandon Allbery <allbery.b@gmail.com> To: Marcelo Gondim <gondim@bsdinfo.com.br> Cc: Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu>, "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@ipfw.ru>, FreeBSD Stable Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: table with bug in ipfw Message-ID: <CAKFCL4V8-Z_8bXWLjWu0JOc7zT=KKDJc%2BgaUGq5roB7aRhoROw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <55B25496.1080308@bsdinfo.com.br> References: <555A8208.9010208@bsdinfo.com.br> <1442671432126620@web6h.yandex.ru> <55B24142.7090001@bsdinfo.com.br> <20150724141053.GH49099@home.opsec.eu> <20150724141153.GI49099@home.opsec.eu> <17501437747436@web25h.yandex.ru> <20150724143103.GJ49099@home.opsec.eu> <55B25496.1080308@bsdinfo.com.br>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Marcelo Gondim <gondim@bsdinfo.com.br> wrote: > On 24-07-2015 11:31, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> This one was fixed in r266310 (based on bin/189471) but I haven't >>> merged it to -stable. >>> >> Because it changes ip_fw.h, would it break KABI or ABI ? >> Would that prevent a merge to 10.2 ? >> >> I do not know if it affects the rule or whether it is merely visual. But > this bug has since version 10.0. > I thought it would be corrected to version 10.2. > Looks to me like it's just applying an IPv6 output format (incorrectly even for IPv6, arguably) to an IPv4 address? -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allbery.b@gmail.com ballbery@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAKFCL4V8-Z_8bXWLjWu0JOc7zT=KKDJc%2BgaUGq5roB7aRhoROw>