inet_pton and oddly-formatted addresses

[Max Laier]

On Sunday 21 January 2007 03:28, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 21:42:44 +0000 (UTC),
> >>>>> "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists at lists.zabbadoz.net> said:
>
> emaste> I think an address like 1.002.3.4 is bizarre, but is our
> inet_pton incorrect emaste> in rejecting it?
>
> >> The change was taken from BIND9.  The following is from BIND9's
> >> CHANGES:
> >>
> >> 935.	[bug]		inet_pton failed to reject leading zeros.
> >
> > well, maybe they were wrong? How does one get in contact with their
> > bugs database these days? Is comp.protocols.dns.bind still a good
> > place to discuss these things?
>
> Or bind-users at isc.org.  And yes, I'd ask the question at some
> BIND-specific list.
>
> 					JINMEI, Tatuya
> 					Communication Platform Lab.
> 					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
> 					jinmei at isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp
>
> p.s. 1.002.3.4 is "illegal" according to RFC3986, Section 3.2.2
> (although it's specified in the context of a URI), so "what is legal"
> is probably a controversial issue.

Section 7.4 is rather clear about the scope of the definition of "dotted 
notation" in 3.2.2. - i.e. it is limited to URIs. inet_aton gethostbyname 
etc. are explicitly allowed to accept platform dependent representations.

-- 
/"\  Best regards,                      | mlaier at freebsd.org
\ /  Max Laier                          | ICQ #67774661
 X   http://pf4freebsd.love2party.net/  | mlaier at EFnet
/ \  ASCII Ribbon Campaign              | Against HTML Mail and News
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/attachments/20070121/dceb3779/attachment.pgp