unreal ircd has hosts that don't have dots in them too.. services hosts
sometimes, even users /VHOSTs are not required to have dots...

we should probably add a SET to make it possible to deal with these
"non-compliant" hosts, since they do indeed exist, and no amount of 
arguing is going to change it :)

-w

On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 06:57:38AM -0500, Chip Norkus wrote:
> On Wed Jan 30, 2002; 10:47AM +0100 Kurt Roeckx propagated the following:
> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 10:00:52PM -0500, Chip Norkus wrote:
> > > 
> > > I'm trying to place a DALnet oper on ignore (one with one of those silly
> > > @DALnet addresses), and epic is completely munging my ignore against my
> > > wishes.
> > > 
> > > I do:  /ignore *!user@*, and epic changes it to: *!user@*.*.  That doesn't
> > > work.  I also tried /ignore *!user@DALnet, and epic changed it to
> > > *!user@DALnet.*
> > 
> > There was an argument about nickserv and things like that on a
> > certain net that didn't have a '.' in them either.  Some people
> > believe the RFC states there should be a '.' in a FQDN, others
> > don't agree.  I think there should be one in it.
> > 
> 
> Whether it's actually RFC compliant or not (I'll check later), people *are*
> doing it and I don't have a choice in the matter.
> 
> > > This behavior is flat-out incorrect.  If I give epic a mask to ignore, it
> > > should not rewrite my mask for me to tell me what I'm doing, especially if,
> > > when rewriting the mask, it ceases to match what it was intended to.
> > 
> > The behaviour is also incorrect in case you try to ban/ignore a
> > ipv6 address which is seperated by ':'.
> > 
> > I sometimes find it very annoying that it does that too.
> > 
> 
> Yes, it's extremely frustrating because if I give it a valid mask, it
> should simply treat it as a valid mask without trying to second guess me.
> If for no other reason than that, I think the behavior should be fixed.
> Nothing is gained from turning '@*' to '@*.*', in fact it simply adds more
> complexity to match() calls the world over.
> 
> mask() behaves in a similar fashion.  If I do $mask(3 foo!bar@baz), I'll
> get a return value of '*!*bar@*.*'.  That's flat-out buggy.  Giving me a
> pattern that doesn't even match my input is incorrect behavior at the core.
> I'll be happy to write a patch for this if I could get it submitted, as
> well.
> 
> > 
> > Kurt
> -wd
> -- 
> chip norkus; c programmer of the apocalypse     [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "question = (to) ? be : !be;" --Shakespeare     http://telekinesis.org
> _______________________________________________
> List mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://epicsol.org/mailman/listinfo/list

-- 
          +------------------+
          | William Rockwood | Sr. System Administrator
          | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | XO Communications,  Chicago DCO
          +------------------+
_______________________________________________
List mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://epicsol.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Reply via email to