commons-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "pin_ptr (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (NET-641) SubnetUtils.SubnetInfo.isInRange("0.0.0.0") returns true for CIDR/31, 32
Date Fri, 04 Aug 2017 15:04:00 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NET-641?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16114477#comment-16114477
] 

pin_ptr commented on NET-641:
-----------------------------

In my opinion, javadoc is wrong.

It does not cause confusion if number of IP addresses that returns true when passed to isInRange()
and number of IP addresses returned from getAddressCount() is always the same.
(Javadoc says they are differ if isInclusiveHostCount is true)

> SubnetUtils.SubnetInfo.isInRange("0.0.0.0") returns true for CIDR/31, 32
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: NET-641
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NET-641
>             Project: Commons Net
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 3.6
>         Environment: Windows; JDK8; common-net 3.6
>            Reporter: pin_ptr
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 3.7
>
>
> Code:
> import org.apache.commons.net.util.SubnetUtils;
> public class A {
>   public static void main(String[] args) {
>     System.out.println(new SubnetUtils("192.168.1.0/30").getInfo().isInRange("0.0.0.0"));
>     System.out.println(new SubnetUtils("192.168.1.0/31").getInfo().isInRange("0.0.0.0"));
>     System.out.println(new SubnetUtils("192.168.1.0/32").getInfo().isInRange("0.0.0.0"));
>   }
> }
> Result:
> false
> true
> true
> Expected:
> false
> false
> false



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Mime
View raw message