Don't treat private IPv4 addresses as being in a non-global scope. The effect of this change is essentially to prefer NATed IPv4 over 6to4.
Change-Id: I53a8613ca9eb61cac0bf18f0b5f98a2d35ab9c50
This commit is contained in:
parent
d4a65d28d4
commit
d1624add2b
1 changed files with 6 additions and 4 deletions
|
@ -1497,11 +1497,13 @@ _get_scope(const struct sockaddr *addr)
|
|||
if (IN_LOOPBACK(na) || /* 127.0.0.0/8 */
|
||||
(na & 0xffff0000) == 0xa9fe0000) { /* 169.254.0.0/16 */
|
||||
return IPV6_ADDR_SCOPE_LINKLOCAL;
|
||||
} else if ((na & 0xff000000) == 0x0a000000 || /* 10.0.0.0/8 */
|
||||
(na & 0xfff00000) == 0xac100000 || /* 172.16.0.0/12 */
|
||||
(na & 0xffff0000) == 0xc0a80000) { /* 192.168.0.0/16 */
|
||||
return IPV6_ADDR_SCOPE_SITELOCAL;
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* According to draft-ietf-6man-rfc3484-revise-01 section 2.3,
|
||||
* it is best not to treat the private IPv4 ranges
|
||||
* (10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12 and 192.168.0.0/16) as being
|
||||
* in a special scope, so we don't.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
return IPV6_ADDR_SCOPE_GLOBAL;
|
||||
}
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue