On 11/6/18 12:31 PM, Bill Fenner wrote:
Playing with this in V5-8-patches, I see it broke my fix for using
clientaddr to specify the source address for traps:
netsnmp_sockaddr_in: addr 0xffd5e824, inpeername "127.0.0.1",
default_target ":0"
netsnmp_sockaddr_in: addr 0xffd5e824, inpeername ":0", default_target
"[NIL]"
netsnmp_sockaddr_in: return { AF_INET, 0.0.0.0:161 <http://0.0.0.0:161> }
netsnmp_sockaddr_in: hostname (resolved okay)
netsnmp_sockaddr_in: return { AF_INET, 127.0.0.1:161
<http://127.0.0.1:161> }
In the previous implementation, specifying a default_target of ":0"
would set the port number to zero, meaning, let the kernel decide. Now,
it appears to mean, use the SNMP default. This causes the bind() to
fail, of course, since binding to 127.0.0.1:0 <http://127.0.0.1:0> would
work fine, but binding to 127.0.0.1:161 <http://127.0.0.1:161> conflicts
with the actual snmpd port.
netsnmp_udpbase: open remote UDP: [172.25.24.62]:5716->[0.0.0.0]:0
netsnmp_udpbase: binding socket: 8 to UDP: [0.0.0.0]:0->[127.0.0.1]:161
netsnmp_udpbase: failed to bind for clientaddr: 13 Permission denied
snmpd: netsnmp_create_notification_session:
/tmp/snmp-test-T180trap2sinkclientaddr_simple-7030/snmpd.conf: line 8:
Error: cannot create sink: udp:172.25.24.62:5716 <http://172.25.24.62:5716>
I've committed my tests for trap2sink, trapsess, and using "-s" with
trapsess. None of the v6 versions work, but the v4 trapsess versions
work, after fixing netsnmp_udpipv4base_transport_with_source() to use
the "bind_addr" variable. I believe that fixing the parsing of ":0" to
return a zero port like it did before would fix trap2sink. I haven't
looked at what's wrong with v6 yet.
(The confusing code in netsnmp_udpipv4base_transport() around
"have_port" and "uses_port", including the introduction
of NETSNMP_DS_LIB_CLIENT_ADDR_USES_PORT, is probably completely working
around this same bug of setting the port when it doesn't need to be set,
and could be eliminated altogether if that bug is fixed.)
Oops, that's something I was not aware of. Can you check that whether
the changes I checked in earlier today fix this regression? Are there
any other regressions than this one that you are aware of?
Thanks,
Bart.
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
