On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Alexander Bluhm <alexander.bl...@gmx.net>
wrote:
> I think there is a missing check and fallthrough in the icmp case.
>
> The logic should be
>
> if (proto == tcp) {
> } else if (proto == udp) {
> } else if (proto == icmp && af == inet) {
> } else if (proto == icmp6 && af == inet6) {
> } else {
> }
>
> The current code would do icmp processing for an ipv6 packet with
> protocol 1. Such a packet is strange but it should not get special
> translation treatment.
>
> bluhm
>
>
we can check if "af == inet" in icmp case obviously, but how and why
can we end up with af == inet6 and an icmp payload (or af == inet
and icmp6 payload for that matter)?
