Attachment 5437 Details for Bug 7191 – Patch to limit #1c registrations to 25

[patch] Patch to limit #1c registrations to 25

netbios-1c-limit-25.patch (text/plain), 3.18 KB, created by Craig Miskell (dead mail address) on 2010-03-01 21:11:56 UTC

(hide)

Description:

Filename:

MIME Type:

Creator: Craig Miskell (dead mail address)

Created: 2010-03-01 21:11:56 UTC

Size: 3.18 KB

patch

obsolete

>--- samba-3.3.10/source/nmbd/nmbd_winsserver.c.orig	2010-03-02 11:49:15.000000000 +1300
>+++ samba-3.3.10/source/nmbd/nmbd_winsserver.c	2010-03-02 15:54:54.000000000 +1300
>@@ -1138,9 +1138,11 @@
> 	uint16 nb_flags = get_nb_flags(nmb->additional->rdata);
> 	int ttl = get_ttl_from_packet(nmb);
> 	struct name_record *namerec = NULL;
>+    struct name_record *name1brec = NULL;
> 	struct in_addr from_ip;
> 	bool registering_group_name = (nb_flags & NB_GROUP) ? True : False;
> 	struct in_addr our_fake_ip;
>+	int i;
> 
> 	(void)interpret_addr2(&our_fake_ip, "0.0.0.0");
> 	putip((char *)&from_ip,&nmb->additional->rdata[2]);
>@@ -1250,6 +1252,48 @@
> 			 */
> 
> 			if(!find_ip_in_name_record(namerec, from_ip)) {
>+				/*
>+				 * Need to emulate the behaviour of Windows, as described in 
>+				 * http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/2001-October/016236.html
>+				 * (is there an MS reference for this somewhere?) because if the 1c list gets over 86 entries, 
>+				 * the reply packet is too big (rdata>576 bytes) so no reply is sent.  
>+				 *
>+				 * Keep only the "latest" 25 records, while ensuring that the PDC (0x1b) is never removed
>+				 * We do this by removing the first entry that isn't the 1b entry for the same name,
>+				 * on the grounds that insertion is at the end of the list, so the oldest entries are 
>+				 * at the start
>+				 *
>+				 */
>+				while(namerec->data.num_ips>=25) {
>+					DEBUG(3,("wins_process_name_registration_request: More than 25 IPs already in the list.  Looking for a 1b record\n"));
>+
>+					/* Appears to be necessary, otherwise we won't always find a 0x1b record*/
>+					fetch_all_active_wins_1b_names();
>+
>+					/* Per the above, find the 1b record, and then remove the first IP that isn't the same */
>+					for( name1brec= subrec->namelist; name1brec; name1brec = name1brec->next ) {
>+						if( WINS_STATE_ACTIVE(name1brec) && name1brec->name.name_type == 0x1b) {
>+							DEBUG(3,("wins_process_name_registration_request: Found the #1b record with ip %s\n", inet_ntoa(name1brec->data.ip[0])));
>+							break; /* out of the for loop, we've found what we're after */
>+						}
>+					}
>+					if(!name1brec) {
>+						DEBUG(3,("wins_process_name_registration_request: Didn't find a #1b name record. Removing the first available entry %s\n", inet_ntoa(namerec->data.ip[0])));
>+						remove_ip_from_name_record(namerec, namerec->data.ip[0]);
>+					} else {
>+						for(i=0; i<namerec->data.num_ips; i++) {
>+							/* The name1brec should only have the single IP address in it, so we only check against the first one*/
>+							if(!ip_equal_v4( namerec->data.ip[i], name1brec->data.ip[0])) {
>+								/* The i'th entry isn't the 1b address; delete it  */
>+								DEBUG(3,("wins_process_name_registration_request: Entry at %d is not the #1b address.  About to remove it\n", i));
>+								remove_ip_from_name_record(namerec, namerec->data.ip[i]);
>+								wins_hook("delete", namerec, 0);
>+								break; //out of the for loop so we don't keep deleting... 
>+							}
>+						}		
>+					}
>+				}
>+				/* The list is guaranteed to be < 25 entries now; safe to add a new one  */
> 				add_ip_to_name_record(namerec, from_ip);
> 				/* we need to update the record for replication */
> 				get_global_id_and_update(&namerec->data.id, True);

Actions: View

Attachments on bug 7191: 5437 | 5443 | 5449 | 5450 | 5451 | 5459