On 01/04/2011 09:02, Robin Seggelmann via RT wrote: > Hi, > > On Apr 1, 2011, at 9:28 AM, via RT wrote: > >> I’ve tested DTLS implementation and know that several fixes has >> been applied for issues related to fragment. > > Thanks for testing! There is a known issue with the bitmask, the > patch #2457 addresses that, but has not been applied to the official > source yet.
I'd be happier about applying these patches if there were tests that showed the brokenness without them ... are there? >> But, it still has a problem to reassemble fragments. Please, check >> the attached patch. > > Patch #2457 corrects the first value in bitmask_end_values[] to 0xff. > Your patch is basically doing the same, but you also shift the entire > array, which requires adjusting the index when accessing it by > subtracting one. Please have a look at http://sctp.fh-muenster.de for > the latest DTLS patches. It would be great if you could confirm that > #2457 fixes the problems you encountered. > > Best regards Robin > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org > Development Mailing List > [email protected] Automated List Manager > [email protected] > > -- http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.links.org/ "There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [email protected] Automated List Manager [email protected]
