openssh bugs - Jul 2003 - [Bug 620] Address bits are backwards when setting up port forwarding on Solaris/intel

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620

           Summary: Address bits are backwards when setting up port
                    forwarding on Solaris/intel
           Product: Portable OpenSSH
           Version: 3.6.1p2
          Platform: ix86
        OS/Version: Solaris
            Status: NEW
          Severity: major
          Priority: P3
         Component: ssh
        AssignedTo: openssh-bugs at mindrot.org
        ReportedBy: jrhett at isite.net


SSH works perfect fine for sessions, scp, sftp and everything else we use it
for, but port forwarding has been broken since 3.4.something...  The local bind
command tries to bind to 1.0.0.127 instead of the proper loopback address.

It wasn't crucial for me, and I got lazy about reporting it while chasing
down
other dramas.  I just downloaded the latest source (3.6.1p2) and compiled it and
the problem remains.  Here's the relevant excerpt from ssh -v ...

jrhett at cyclops.elysium.isite.net's password: 
debug1: Authentication succeeded (password).
debug1: Connections to local port 52881 forwarded to remote address medusa:23
debug1: Local forwarding listening on ::1 port 52881.
bind: Cannot assign requested address
debug1: Local forwarding listening on 1.0.0.127 port 52881.
bind: Cannot assign requested address



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620





------- Additional Comments From dtucker at zip.com.au  2003-07-17 13:36 -------
What are HAVE_GETADDRINFO and BROKEN_GETADDRINFO set to in config.h?




------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620





------- Additional Comments From jrhett at isite.net  2003-07-18 01:38 -------
#define HAVE_STRUCT_ADDRINFO 1

/* getaddrinfo is broken (if present) */
/* #undef BROKEN_GETADDRINFO */




------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620





------- Additional Comments From jrhett at isite.net  2003-07-18 01:40 -------
Created an attachment (id=357)
 --> (http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/attachment.cgi?id=357&action=view)
The generated config.h

This is the entire generated config.h from my system, which is Solaris 8, x86.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620





------- Additional Comments From dtucker at zip.com.au  2003-07-18 02:02 -------
You do have #define HAVE_GETADDRINFO 1.  Try defining BROKEN_GETADDRINFO in 
config.h and recompiling.

It looks like Solaris/Intel might have an endian problem in getaddrinfo.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620





------- Additional Comments From jrhett at isite.net  2003-07-18 03:02 -------
Changing that config.h parameter solved the problem.  Thanks!

FYI: this is somewhat funny, because Eric? and I had to solve this problem back
in the original SSH 5 or so years ago... it just keeps coming up ;-)

Anyway, can you guys come up with a patch or do you want me to dig around and
come up with one?  I'm fine with headers and such, but I really haven't
gotten
my head around autoconf at all so you'll have to lead me around by the nose.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620





------- Additional Comments From jrhett at isite.net  2003-07-18 04:48 -------
Created an attachment (id=358)
 --> (http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/attachment.cgi?id=358&action=view)
configure.ac patch

Keep in mind that I'm not really good at autoconf, so this may be the
absolutely wrong way to do this .. but here is a possible patch for
configure.ac that would seem likely to address the problem.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620





------- Additional Comments From dtucker at zip.com.au  2003-07-18 13:40 -------
We can put a work-around in OpenSSH but why don't you report the problem to
Sun
too so they can actually fix it?  



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620

dtucker at zip.com.au changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED



------- Additional Comments From dtucker at zip.com.au  2003-07-19 20:44 -------
Fix applied, thanks.
You should report the getaddrinfo problem to Sun, though.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620





------- Additional Comments From djm at mindrot.org  2003-07-19 23:13 -------
Would it be possible to write a test program to determine whether a given
platform has this bug? This would be preferable to unconditionally defining
BROKEN_GETADDRINFO as that effectively disables IPv6 support, which is a
somewhat high price to pay...



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620

dtucker at zip.com.au changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|FIXED                       |



------- Additional Comments From dtucker at zip.com.au  2003-07-20 00:31 -------
It should be possible to detect this at build time.
Does the attached stand-alone test detect the problem on Solaris/x86?



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620





------- Additional Comments From dtucker at zip.com.au  2003-07-20 00:33 -------
Created an attachment (id=359)
 --> (http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/attachment.cgi?id=359&action=view)
Test loopback address for sanity.




------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620





------- Additional Comments From dtucker at zip.com.au  2003-07-22 23:00 -------
Hmm, this is a know Solaris/x86 bug (Sun bug #4356490, patch #111328-01).

I think the patch should just be backed out.  The problem isn't fatal and as
Damien pointed out it can break previously working functionality.  If you want
it to work right then hack config.h yourself or fix yer system :-)



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620





------- Additional Comments From djm at mindrot.org  2003-07-23 14:14 -------
yeah, back it out. Is the patch in the standard, recommended patch cluster from
Sun?



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620

dtucker at zip.com.au changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |INVALID



------- Additional Comments From dtucker at zip.com.au  2003-07-23 14:37 -------
Have backed out the changes.  The patch I mentioned is part of the recomended 
patch cluster for Solaris/x86.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620

jrhett at isite.net changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|INVALID                     |



------- Additional Comments From jrhett at isite.net  2003-07-23 23:22 -------
Woah, hold it there.  The system on which this problem was found and reported
from has 111328-04 installed (we are current on all Recommended patches) and the
problem still occurred.

While I agree that this could and should be fixed in the Solaris headers, the
fix should at least be known. The patch you've mentioned does not fix it.  



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=620





------- Additional Comments From dtucker at zip.com.au  2003-07-23 23:46 -------
The Sun bug describes the problem you're having exactly:
[quote]
The following programs prints an unexpected result on S8/Intel:
[snip]
                   straddr: 1.0.0.127
[/quote]

So it looks like the fix has regressed between 111328-01 and 111328-04.

Does attachment id #359 detect the problem on your system?  Have you reported 
the problem to Sun?



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.