Skip to content
New issue

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

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

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Recheck and fix RFC2622 prefix matching for IPv6 #597

Open
1 of 4 tasks
vkotronis opened this issue Apr 15, 2021 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #598
Open
1 of 4 tasks

Recheck and fix RFC2622 prefix matching for IPv6 #597

vkotronis opened this issue Apr 15, 2021 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #598
Assignees

Comments

@vkotronis
Copy link
Member

Describe the bug
The RFC2622 operators need to be rechecked for IPv6 specifically, since we have seen v6 prefixes that while in the configuration file in an operator expression, do not make it correctly to the prefix tree.

Affected Component(s)

  • Back-End (Database, Microservices, Containers, etc)
  • Front-End (Flask, API, etc)
  • Docs
  • Build System

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

  1. Go to '...'
  2. Click on '....'
  3. Scroll down to '....'
  4. See error

Expected behavior
A clear and concise description of what you expected to happen.

Screenshots
If applicable, add screenshots to help explain your problem.

System (please complete the following information):

  • OS: [e.g. iOS]
  • Browser [e.g. chrome, safari]
  • Version [e.g. 22]

Additional context
Add any other context about the problem here.

@vkotronis vkotronis added this to the release-2.1.0 milestone Apr 15, 2021
@vkotronis vkotronis self-assigned this Apr 15, 2021
@vkotronis vkotronis added the p/high High priority label Apr 15, 2021
@vkotronis vkotronis linked a pull request Apr 15, 2021 that will close this issue
18 tasks
@vkotronis vkotronis removed this from the release-2.1.0 milestone May 13, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant