Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

mcproxy: fix igmpv3 and mld record type #1032

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

rthakur33
Copy link

This patch fixes that if IGMPv3 Membership Report packet on the LAN interface with ALLOW_NEW_SOURCES record containing specific source is sent, then IGMPv3 Membership Report packet is received on the WAN interface and group record is ALLOW_NEW_SOURCES for the group with a matching source list.

This patch fixes that if IGMPv3 Membership Report packet on the
LAN interface with ALLOW_NEW_SOURCES record containing specific
source is sent, then IGMPv3 Membership Report packet is received
on the WAN interface and group record is ALLOW_NEW_SOURCES for
the group with a matching source list.

Signed-off-by: Rahul Thakur  <rahul.thakur@iopsys.eu>
@mwarning
Copy link
Contributor

mwarning commented Nov 7, 2023

@sbyx ping

@BKPepe
Copy link
Member

BKPepe commented Feb 4, 2024

Is this patch included in upstream? If not, are you willing to send it there?

@rthakur33
Copy link
Author

Is this patch included in upstream? If not, are you willing to send it there?

@BKPepe , thanks for your comment, I actually tried there first mcproxy/mcproxy#18 but got no response hence raised this as a patch here.

@BKPepe
Copy link
Member

BKPepe commented Jul 21, 2024

I was thinking, if the upstream is dead for more than 7 years. What about rather dropping this package at all? Here are a few points which leads that removing is gonna be helpful:

  • If there is any issue (bug/security vulnerability), upstream developers probably will not look into it.
  • If you want to have fixed something there, then most likely, it will not get any attention as well.
  • I am not able to see this package in other GNU/Linux distributions such as Debian, Ubuntu, etc.

Sometimes, it is just better to move on instead of relying on something which is obviously not working.

@rthakur33
Copy link
Author

I was thinking, if the upstream is dead for more than 7 years. What about rather dropping this package at all? Here are a few points which leads that removing is gonna be helpful:

  • If there is any issue (bug/security vulnerability), upstream developers probably will not look into it.
  • If you want to have fixed something there, then most likely, it will not get any attention as well.
  • I am not able to see this package in other GNU/Linux distributions such as Debian, Ubuntu, etc.

Sometimes, it is just better to move on instead of relying on something which is obviously not working.

+1 from me.

@BKPepe
Copy link
Member

BKPepe commented Jul 23, 2024

I will create PR for removal shortly.

# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants