IPv6 hosts allow|deny

Dave Dykstra dwd at drdykstra.us
Thu Jan 9 21:25:00 EST 2003

I went ahead and submitted Hideaki's patch pretty much as is.  I took off
the ifdef around the memset at the beginning of client_sockaddr() because
I figured it wouldn't hurt to do anywhere.  Besides, it was checking
for a specific operating system (__linux__) which we like to avoid and
because there was a typo in the check for HAVE_SOCKADDR_IN6_SCOPE_ID
(it was HAVE_SOCKADDR_IN6_SOCPE_ID).  I noticed that there was code in
access.c that was accessing the same sockaddr_in6 sin6_scope_id field that
was protected by ifdef in clientname.c so I put the same ifdef around
the code in access.c.  I also updated the rsyncd.conf.yo documentation
to allow for IP address of the IPv6 form.

I have not tested this, I hope it works.

- Dave

On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 08:24:13AM -0600, Dave Dykstra wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 12:25:15AM +0100, Bert Vermeulen wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 Jan 2003, Dave Dykstra wrote:
> > 
> > > Even though rsync maintenance isn't as bad as wget's, the maintainers
> > > are all VERY part time so that is a big part of the problem.  Most of us
> > > don't have ipv6 systems to test things on.  Can you vouch for the quality
> > > of the patch?  I was able to get it with
> > >
> > >     wget --passive ftp://ftp.linux-ipv6.org/pub/usagi/misc/rsync-2_5_5-v6auth-20021016.patch.gz
> > >
> > > and it looks quite extensive.
> > 
> > Yes, it's very extensive, and there's some code in there that's pretty
> > advanced.
> > 
> > The fact of the matter is, I made my own patch for this functionality first,
> > and only then noticed Hideaki's patch -- and his, while not as readable to
> > the casual observer, seems like better code. He is rewriting the linux
> > kernel IPv6 stack, so I'd expect his rsync patch to be decent :-)
> > 
> > Nevertheless, feel free to take a look at my patch:
> > 	http://biot.com/patches/rsync-ipv6-acl.patch
> > 
> > So I haven't used Hideaki's patch, but I use mine, and it's good. Please do
> > apply one of them however.
> Since you're more familiar with that area of the code than any of the
> rsync maintainers and you think his patch is better, please test out his
> patch and look it over to see if you think there should be any changes.
> In particular, I see that yours includes documentation changes and his
> doesn't.
> - Dave

More information about the rsync mailing list