Reads correct to me, OK florian

Would it make sense to always surround an IPv6 address with [], even if
port == 0?

On 2024-07-01 14:55 +09, YASUOKA Masahiko <yasuoka@openbsd.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When iked(8) represents an IPv6 address with a port number, the port
> part might be interpreted as a last 2 octets of the address.
>
> I'd like to enclose the address in bracket.
>
> ok?
>
> Index: sbin/iked/util.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/sbin/iked/util.c,v
> diff -u -p -r1.44 util.c
> --- sbin/iked/util.c	3 Feb 2024 00:38:08 -0000	1.44
> +++ sbin/iked/util.c	1 Jul 2024 05:39:58 -0000
> @@ -644,16 +644,16 @@ prefixlen2mask6(uint8_t prefixlen, uint3
>  const char *
>  print_addr(void *addr)
>  {
> -	static char	 sbuf[IKED_CYCLE_BUFFERS][NI_MAXHOST + 7];
> +	static char	 sbuf[IKED_CYCLE_BUFFERS][NI_MAXHOST + 9];
>  	static int	 idx;
>  	struct sockaddr	*sa = addr;
> -	char		*buf;
> -	size_t		 len;
> +	char		*buf, *hbuf;
> +	size_t		 len, hlen;
>  	char		 pbuf[7];
>  	in_port_t	 port;
>  
> -	buf = sbuf[idx];
> -	len = sizeof(sbuf[idx]);
> +	hbuf = buf = sbuf[idx];
> +	hlen = len = sizeof(sbuf[idx]);
>  	if (++idx >= IKED_CYCLE_BUFFERS)
>  		idx = 0;
>  
> @@ -662,13 +662,21 @@ print_addr(void *addr)
>  		return (buf);
>  	}
>  
> +	if ((port = socket_getport(sa)) != 0 && sa->sa_family == AF_INET6) {
> +		/* surround [] */
> +		*(hbuf++) = '[';
> +		hlen--;
> +	}
> +
>  	if (getnameinfo(sa, sa->sa_len,
> -	    buf, len, NULL, 0, NI_NUMERICHOST) != 0) {
> +	    hbuf, hlen, NULL, 0, NI_NUMERICHOST) != 0) {
>  		strlcpy(buf, "unknown", len);
>  		return (buf);
>  	}
>  
> -	if ((port = socket_getport(sa)) != 0) {
> +	if (port != 0) {
> +		if (sa->sa_family == AF_INET6)
> +			(void)strlcat(buf, "]", len);
>  		snprintf(pbuf, sizeof(pbuf), ":%d", port);
>  		(void)strlcat(buf, pbuf, len);
>  	}
>

-- 
In my defence, I have been left unsupervised.