On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 05:22:25PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 05:06:00PM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > I think it is better to use a safe ideom when matching against a peer name
> > instead of forcefully NUL terminate the string somewhere unrelated.
> > By default all th
Theo Buehler wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 05:22:25PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 05:06:00PM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > > I think it is better to use a safe ideom when matching against a peer name
> > > instead of forcefully NUL terminate the string somewhere un
Theo Buehler wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 05:06:00PM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > I think it is better to use a safe ideom when matching against a peer name
> > instead of forcefully NUL terminate the string somewhere unrelated.
> > By default all these string buffers use the same size so
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 05:22:25PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 05:06:00PM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > I think it is better to use a safe ideom when matching against a peer name
> > instead of forcefully NUL terminate the string somewhere unrelated.
> > By default all th
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 05:06:00PM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> I think it is better to use a safe ideom when matching against a peer name
> instead of forcefully NUL terminate the string somewhere unrelated.
> By default all these string buffers use the same size so strncmp() will
> not clip sinc
I think it is better to use a safe ideom when matching against a peer name
instead of forcefully NUL terminate the string somewhere unrelated.
By default all these string buffers use the same size so strncmp() will
not clip since the peer description is enforced by bgpd to be smaller.
Another opti
