accel-ppp.git/accel-pppd/ctrl/pppoe/tr101.c, branch 1.15.0High performance PPTP/L2TP/SSTP/PPPoE/IPoE server for Linux (mirror of https://github.com/accel-ppp/accel-ppp.git)
https://git.amelek.net/accel-ppp/accel-ppp.git/atom?h=1.15.02026-09-01T06:08:47+00:00utils: centralize unaligned integer accessors2026-09-01T06:08:47+00:00Denys Fedoryshchenkodenys.f@collabora.com2026-09-01T06:08:47+00:00urn:sha1:7d4f8524f57ba0ac77e47171bebfc0370df667b1pppoe: decode tag integers alignment-safely2026-09-01T05:55:54+00:00Denys Fedoryshchenkodenys.f@collabora.com2026-09-01T05:50:04+00:00urn:sha1:6c4593a87e689a83d7308efb0913a8dd9182051b
Read peer-controlled PPPoE tag and TR-101 integer fields through aligned temporaries, validate PPP-Max-Payload before formatting, and avoid unaligned cookie timestamp accesses.
pppoe: fix typo2014-01-19T16:58:34+00:00Dmitry Kozlovxeb@mail.ru2014-01-19T16:58:34+00:00urn:sha1:2ee198430cfc5c6cbf99b5110ebd212d64f22ef0
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Kozlov <xeb@mail.ru>
pppoe: handle TR-101 vs. RFC 4679 incompatibilities2014-01-19T10:22:18+00:00Guillaume Naultg.nault@alphalink.fr2014-01-17T21:01:35+00:00urn:sha1:bf4aad6aeb3e2f150b642f29881b8de691038ac2
There are a few inconsistencies between TR-101 and RFC 4679.
Since RFC 4679 is only informational, prefer TR-101 in case
of incompatibilities and explicitely document this choice.
Signed-off-by: Guillaume Nault <g.nault@alphalink.fr>
pppoe: handle IFW-SESSION TR-101 sub-tag2014-01-17T11:35:27+00:00Guillaume Naultg.nault@alphalink.fr2014-01-16T20:25:35+00:00urn:sha1:42b8eaa35951e5381a7963d6bded7fa28b9b1713
This TR-101 sub-tag has no payload.
Signed-off-by: Guillaume Nault <g.nault@alphalink.fr>
pppoe: add missing support for some TR-101 sub-tags2014-01-17T11:35:27+00:00Guillaume Naultg.nault@alphalink.fr2014-01-16T20:25:09+00:00urn:sha1:d0c5faf047fa085795e6881b67bcb6af73b2a90d
These are all 4 bytes integer values, except ACCESS_LOOP_ENCAP
which represents three independant values of one byte each.
Signed-off-by: Guillaume Nault <g.nault@alphalink.fr>
pppoe: fix TR-101 tag length check2014-01-17T11:35:27+00:00Guillaume Naultg.nault@alphalink.fr2014-01-16T20:24:54+00:00urn:sha1:3853053fc88c1b9a34b90174de25c5965a484e1b
The length field of PPPoE TR-101 sub-tags only takes the payload size
into account (as opposed to its RADIUS counterpart that stores the
full sub-tag length, including the 2 bytes long header).
Signed-off-by: Guillaume Nault <g.nault@alphalink.fr>
pppoe: fix TR-101 attribute filtering for RADIUS access requests2014-01-17T11:35:27+00:00Guillaume Naultg.nault@alphalink.fr2014-01-16T20:24:32+00:00urn:sha1:fe1ad9b7a0e53250c8bf2c7d238a202e81fcbc12
When a sub-tags is skipped while parsing a TR-101 tag, the ptr variable
must be updated to point to the next sub-tag, otherwise the next loop
iteration erroneously interprets tag information.
While here, fix the range of attribute that mustn't be present in RADIUS
access requests (RFC 4679, section 4).
Signed-off-by: Guillaume Nault <g.nault@alphalink.fr>
pppoe: fix Minimum-Data-Rate-Downstream TR101 sub-tag handling2014-01-17T11:35:27+00:00Guillaume Naultg.nault@alphalink.fr2014-01-16T20:24:17+00:00urn:sha1:cbebd3b97616ea25e7ee197d5412b4baead0399f
As per TR-101 specifications and RFC 4679, 0x84 is the sub-tag
number for Minimum-Data-Rate-Downstream (instead of
Maximum-Data-Rate-Upstream).
Signed-off-by: Guillaume Nault <g.nault@alphalink.fr>
pppoe: tr101 fixes2011-01-05T12:56:41+00:00Dmitry Kozlovxeb@mail.ru2011-01-05T12:56:41+00:00urn:sha1:c675662132b07f30a43291bf001ac2f730b7b46e