Alexander Bluhm(alexander.bl...@gmx.net) on 2019.11.14 22:50:50 +0100:
> Hi,
>
> While writing my ifconfig regress test I realized that IPv6 netmasks
> are parsed, but silently ignored. Ignoring commandline parameters
> feels wrong and is inconsistent to IPv4.
>
> Of course I don't expect anyone to use something like this:
>
> ifconfig vether0 inet6 fdd7:e83e:66bc:ffff::17 netmask
> ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff
reminds me of the problems in route.
> But current implementation sets a prefixlen 64 in this case.
>
> ok?
diff is ok, but ...
The alternative is to not allow netmask for ipv6 and only /<prefixlen> and
prefixlen
<prefixlen>. Why support such a crazy way of specifying the mask?
In route we removed a few quirks like that with notice in current.html , why
not here?
Con: Unfortunatly most netmasks configured will be /64, so probability is high
that if someone actually uses netmask, the problem wont be noticed.
> bluhm
>
> Index: sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /data/mirror/openbsd/cvs/src/sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.414
> diff -u -p -r1.414 ifconfig.c
> --- sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.c 24 Oct 2019 18:54:10 -0000 1.414
> +++ sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.c 14 Nov 2019 21:27:47 -0000
> @@ -1301,6 +1301,7 @@ void
> setifnetmask(const char *addr, int ignored)
> {
> afp->af_getaddr(addr, MASK);
> + explicit_prefix = 1;
> }
>
> /* ARGSUSED */
>
