On 22/10/2019 20:41, Roy Marples wrote:
> On 22/10/2019 17:17, Normen Kowalewski wrote:
>> FAIW - i was curious to see if RFC 8415 of November 2018, the update
>> of the now officially obsoleted RFC 3315, uses some other wording, but
>> it also just speaks about 4 octets that jointly are an
On 22/10/2019 17:17, Normen Kowalewski wrote:
FAIW - i was curious to see if RFC 8415 of November 2018, the update of
the now officially obsoleted RFC 3315, uses some other wording, but it
also just speaks about 4 octets that jointly are an unsigned integer
Hi Geert, Dominik,
FAIW - i was curious to see if RFC 8415 of November 2018, the update of the now
officially obsoleted RFC 3315, uses some other wording, but it also just speaks
about 4 octets that jointly are an unsigned integer
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8415#section-21.21
On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 07:19:13PM +0200, Dominik DL6ER wrote:
> Dear mailing list,
>
> The proposed patch ensures that the DHCPv6 IAID is of unsigned type.
> This is entirely uncritical, however, as the variable is already now
> interpreted and handled as being of unsigned type in
> *
Dear mailing list,
The proposed patch ensures that the DHCPv6 IAID is of unsigned type.
This is entirely uncritical, however, as the variable is already now
interpreted and handled as being of unsigned type in
* lease.c:read_leases(),
* helper.c:create_helper(),
* dbus.c:dbus_add_lease(), and
*
