--- Begin Message ---
Package: libc6
Version: 2.36-9+deb12u4
Severity: normal
Tags: ipv6
Dear Maintainer,
I compiled the example program given in the inet_pton(3) man page, and obtain
the following:
$ ./a.out i6 0:0:0:ffff:5:6:7:8
::ffff:5:6:7:8
$ ./a.out i6 0:0:0:ffff:5.6.7.8
Not in presentation format
$ ./a.out i6 0:0:0:0:0:ffff:5.6.7.8
::ffff:5.6.7.8
Best
Ale
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 12.0
merged-usr: no
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 6.1.0-18-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU threads; PREEMPT)
Locale: LANG=en_IE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_IE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE not set
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Init: sysvinit (via /sbin/init)
Versions of packages libc6 depends on:
ii libgcc-s1 12.2.0-14
Versions of packages libc6 recommends:
ii libidn2-0 2.3.3-1+b1
Versions of packages libc6 suggests:
ii debconf [debconf-2.0] 1.5.82
ii glibc-doc 2.36-9+deb12u4
ii libc-l10n 2.36-9+deb12u4
ii libnss-nis 3.1-4
ii libnss-nisplus 1.3-4
ii locales 2.36-9+deb12u4
-- debconf information excluded
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
On 2024-03-27 16:33, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> On Tue 26/Mar/2024 20:14:27 +0100 Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > On 2024-03-26 12:53, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> > > Package: libc6
> > > Version: 2.36-9+deb12u4
> > > Severity: normal
> > > Tags: ipv6
> > >
> > > Dear Maintainer,
> > >
> > > I compiled the example program given in the inet_pton(3) man page, and obtain
> > > the following:
> > >
> > > $ ./a.out i6 0:0:0:ffff:5:6:7:8
> > > ::ffff:5:6:7:8
> > > $ ./a.out i6 0:0:0:ffff:5.6.7.8
> > > Not in presentation format
> > > $ ./a.out i6 0:0:0:0:0:ffff:5.6.7.8
> > > ::ffff:5.6.7.8
> >
> > Could you please tell me what do you find curious and what do you expect
> > instead? Thanks.
>
>
> Yeah, sorry about that. I counted one word per tag, irrespective of it
> being hex or decimal. So, for the last case I though heck, 10 tag is
> 160-bit. I was so persuaded that, when Bastian told me the 8-word
> "0:0:0:ffff:5.6.7.8" is not valid I went to RFC 4291 and when I read there
> that the 10-tag IP 0:0:0:0:0:0:13.1.68.3 is valid, I started filling an
> errata against it. I copied the following passage with the idea of
> correcting it by removing a couple of "x"s.
>
> 3. An alternative form that is sometimes more convenient when dealing
> with a mixed environment of IPv4 and IPv6 nodes is
> x:x:x:x:x:x:d.d.d.d, where the 'x's are the hexadecimal values of
> the six high-order 16-bit pieces of the address, and the 'd's are
> the decimal values of the four low-order 8-bit pieces of the
> address (standard IPv4 representation).
>
> Only at that point I read the text carefully and realized how mistaken I
> was. I aborted the errata submission, of course. But for the bug report,
> which I had already sent, I can only apologize.
No worries, thanks for your feedback. I am just closing the bugs with
this mail.
Regards
Aurelien
--
Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
aurelien@aurel32.net http://aurel32.net
--- End Message ---