I looked at this very briefly.
It's gnarly because in_canforward() is a candidate for inlining and is a
predicate which is being overloaded with different meanings by
ip_forward()/ip_input() and icmp_reflect().
So whilst the fix is most likely a 3 liner, it risks making the code
look crap. We genuinely don't want to forward 169.254.0.0/16 traffic,
however we genuinely need to reply to ICMP which originates from these
ranges.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Synopsis: no response to ICMP traffic on interface configured with a link-local
address
Responsible-Changed-From-To: bms->freebsd-net
Responsible-Changed-By: bms
Responsible-Changed-When: Fri 22 Feb 2008 21:23:23 UTC
Responsible-Changed-Why:
The secretary disavows all knowledge of your actions.
["Responsible" implies "I'll fix it", I said no such thing.. I *MIGHT*
get around to it, but "Responsible" implies there's an obligation.
Cheeky linimon!]
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=120958
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
