Re: [nft PATCH] evaluate: better error reporting in too long sets names

[Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 07:36:38PM +0200, Jozsef Kadlecsik wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 03:43:00PM +0200, Arturo Borrero Gonzalez wrote:
> > > Currently, if we choose a set name larger than allowed, the error message is:
> > >  Error: Could not process rule: Numerical result out of range
> > > 
> > > Let's inform the user with a better error message.
> > > 
> > > We can discuss later if length of set names should be increased, but I think
> > > this better error reporting is necessary right now to avoid headaches to users.
> > 
> > /* The max length of strings including NUL: set and type identifiers */
> > #define IPSET_MAXNAMELEN        32
> > 
> > I would like that we get the same length as ipset, this should make it
> > easier for people to migrate.
> 
> I think it's all right if set names are longer in nftables. That won't 
> cause incompatibilites, unless someone wants to move from nftables to 
> ipset.

Currently in nftables we have 16 bytes, so we're smaller than ipset.