Skip to content

Conversation

andrewnester
Copy link
Contributor

@andrewnester andrewnester commented Jun 7, 2017

Fix for https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=74699

According to IPv4 Multicast Address Space Registry (https://www.iana.org/assignments/multicast-addresses/multicast-addresses.xhtml) IP addresses 224.0.0.0 – 224.0.0.255 are reserved

@tpunt
Copy link
Contributor

tpunt commented Jun 7, 2017

This behaviour appears to affect later versions of PHP 7.0 too (see 3v4l), so this PR should target the PHP-7.0 branch.

@andrewnester andrewnester changed the base branch from PHP-7.1 to PHP-7.0 June 7, 2017 11:51
@andrewnester
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tpunt Thanks! just retargeted my PR to PHP-7.0 branch

@nikic
Copy link
Member

nikic commented Jun 7, 2017

There seems to be some disagreement as to whether or not this is reserved?

@andrewnester
Copy link
Contributor Author

@nikic I would say that it's better to follow Multicast Address specification in this case. But I suspect that it requires some discussion anyway

@krakjoe
Copy link
Member

krakjoe commented Jun 13, 2017

Could you start that discussion on internals and link back to it here please.

@andrewnester
Copy link
Contributor Author

@krakjoe here is link to started discussion
http://news.php.net/php.internals/99510

@krakjoe
Copy link
Member

krakjoe commented Jul 10, 2017

@andrewnester bump the discussion on internals, I would ...

@bwoebi @kelunik @DaveRandom do input please

@bwoebi
Copy link
Member

bwoebi commented Jul 10, 2017

Either we ban the whole block of 224.0.0.0/4 because multicast-reserved, or not at all.

At least we do not ban other strictly local net ranges like 10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12, 192.168.0.0/16, where RFC 1918 specifies as well that routers should not propagate the address into the public internet; the same restriction this very range also has.

This function seems to generally only apply to addresses reserved for link-local endpoints.
So, I'd say, we should reject this PR, in order to remain consistent with current behavior.

@krakjoe
Copy link
Member

krakjoe commented Jan 30, 2019

Based on the rejection by a member of the group and the fact there has been no activity on this PR or discussion for a long time, I'm going to close this PR.

If I'm wrong to do that, please open a fresh PR and bump that discussion on internals.

@krakjoe krakjoe closed this Jan 30, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants