lwIP - A Lightweight TCP/IP stack - Patches: patch #9165, Allowing udp src port to be 0 in...
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
patch #9165: Allowing udp src port to be 0 in cases when we don't care about outgoing port
Submitter: | Alex Moran <alex081293> | ||
Submitted: | Thu 17 Nov 2016 10:25:35 PM UTC | ||
Category: | UDP | Priority: | 5 - Normal |
Status: | Invalid | Privacy: | Public |
Assigned to: | None | Open/Closed: | Closed |
Planned Release: | None |
Jump to the original submission
Tue 22 Nov 2016 09:42:55 PM UTC, comment #8: |
Alex Moran <alex081293> |
Tue 22 Nov 2016 09:01:36 PM UTC, comment #7:
|
Sylvain Rochet <gradator> |
Tue 22 Nov 2016 08:41:48 PM UTC, comment #6:
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Tue 22 Nov 2016 08:31:52 PM UTC, comment #5: I apologize if this is the wrong area for this discussion. I didn't think it was a bug because I was presenting a solution to a problem. I would be happy to discuss this in the proper location.
|
Alex Moran <alex081293> |
Tue 22 Nov 2016 07:41:53 PM UTC, comment #4: Me neither.
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Tue 22 Nov 2016 02:07:01 PM UTC, comment #3: Ah!, I didn't understand why that was merged in and I was too lazy to argue about it :-)
|
Sylvain Rochet <gradator> |
Tue 22 Nov 2016 01:37:19 PM UTC, comment #2: Reverted, same behavior can be achieved by NOT calling udp_connect() and comparing source address to be RecvIPAddress.
|
Dirk Ziegelmeier <dziegel> |
Fri 18 Nov 2016 07:19:46 AM UTC, comment #1: Thanks for the improvement! |
Dirk Ziegelmeier <dziegel> |
Thu 17 Nov 2016 10:25:35 PM UTC, original submission:
In the case of knowing the senders IP address, the host running LWIP should be able to open a socket on their known local port and be able to receive packets from the known sender without caring about its source port.
|
Alex Moran <alex081293> |
No files currently attached
Depends on the following items: None found
Items that depend on this one: None found
There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.
Follow 3 latest changes.
Date | Changed by | Updated Field | Previous Value | => | Replaced by |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2016-11-22 | dziegel | Status | Done | Invalid | |
2016-11-18 | dziegel | Status | None | Done | |
Open/Closed | Open | Closed |
Powered by Savane 3.13-02a9.
Corresponding source code
I believe I realize why it's a bad idea. I was not considering that from a successful udp_connect, you are assuming that communication to/from that address:port are eligible. By using connect with port 0, you would not able to send (with normal udp_send) to the remote IP, only receive. You would need to use udp_sendto and specify a different port. For this reason, I can see why it'd be a bad solution, although I do think the problem still exists. I appreciate you all entertaining the idea.