
2 Nov
2015
2 Nov
'15
9:42 p.m.
Hi Chris,
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 2:43 AM, Chris Packham judge.packham@gmail.com wrote:
Previously values greater than 255 were implicitly truncated. Add some stricter checking to reject addresses with components >255.
With the input "1234192.168.1.1" the old behaviour would truncate the address to 192.168.1.1. New behaviour rejects the string outright and returns 0.0.0.0, which for the purposes of IP addresses can be considered an error.
Signed-off-by: Chris Packham judge.packham@gmail.com
Acked-by: Joe Hershberger