-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 251
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Inconsistent limits for address generation via -g
, --generator
using either range or CIDR
#299
Comments
To collect relevant information in one place:
|
Another point to consider: Using
Therefore I'd say that having a limit is useful. |
Have you found a solution to the problem? |
Yes, I already have a (partial) solution to this as part of an older, now closed, pull request. I'll try to find the time to adapt it to the current |
As described in GH issue schweikert#299, the MAX_GENERATE+1 limit is only applied when using an address range, not when using CIDR. This commit changes this to always honor the generator limit. * refactor target address generation to use the same new function for both range and CIDR notation * check the limit for addresses to generate in the new function * document the generator limit in "fping --help" output * document the generator limit in the fping man page * test that the address generation limit applies when using CIDR notation
As described in GH issue #299, the MAX_GENERATE+1 limit is only applied when using an address range, not when using CIDR. This commit changes this to always honor the generator limit. * refactor target address generation to use the same new function for both range and CIDR notation * check the limit for addresses to generate in the new function * document the generator limit in "fping --help" output * document the generator limit in the fping man page * test that the address generation limit applies when using CIDR notation
When using
fping -g
with a range, the number of addresses that may be generated is limited (via theMAX_GENERATE
constant insrc/fping.c
):But this limit is not applied when using CIDR notation:
I have mentioned this in a comment on issue #59, because I think that applying a consistent limit to address generation is a prerequisite for expanding
-g
functionality to include IPv6, but I'd prefer to track this issue independently.I can refresh my respective patches that have been part of the IPv6 generator pull request #254 and submit them as a new pull request. Just let me know if this desired.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: