Bug 30289
| Summary: | the route command evaluates arguments in an undocumented and wrong way | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Base System | Reporter: | do not answer to this address - it's gonna go again <wefa> |
| Component: | bin | Assignee: | ru <ru> |
| Status: | Closed FIXED | ||
| Severity: | Affects Only Me | ||
| Priority: | Normal | ||
| Version: | 4.3-RELEASE | ||
| Hardware: | Any | ||
| OS: | Any | ||
State Changed From-To: open->closed This is the documented syntax, please consult the route(8) manpage: : The other commands have the following syntax: : : route [-n] command [-net | -host] destination gateway [netmask] Note the optional third parameter. If specified, it's treated like if -netmask <netmask> was specified. Responsible Changed From-To: freebsd-bugs->ru |
a wrong but not uncommon command line leads to very strange results: nxcon# 18:16 [img]route add 192.168.78.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.77.1 add net 192.168.78.0: gateway 255.255.255.0 nxcon# 18:16 [img]route -n get 192.168.78.4 route to: 192.168.78.4 destination: 192.168.76.0 mask: 192.168.77.1 gateway: 255.255.255.0 interface: xl0 flags: <UP,GATEWAY,DONE,STATIC,PRCLONING> recvpipe sendpipe ssthresh rtt,msec rttvar hopcount mtu expire 0 0 0 0 0 0 1500 0 The problem here is obvious - but in other circumstances this could produce an 'apparently working system' (ping works to some target host) but which is completely wrong. according to the man page route should - consider the address a host address - ignore the third parameter in my opinion, route should instead - recognize the illegal parameter - abort with an error message Unfortunately it does neither. (Of course it also could recognize and correctly evaluate the statement as intended, but that's a matter of design and not the issue here.) How-To-Repeat: see above