Page MenuHomePhabricator

Block log reports should honor CIDR ranges
Closed, DuplicatePublicBUG REPORT

Description

List of steps to reproduce (step by step, including full links if applicable):

What happens?:
The first one shows the range block, the second one doesn't.

What should have happened instead?:
Since the two notations both refer to the same range, they should both return the same result, in much the same way that contributions normalizes CIDR notation.

Event Timeline

Jdforrester-WMF subscribed.

Would you expect the request to the second to silently redirect to the first?

Oh, T270798 even has a patch for review. That was Sep 4 2021, though. :/

Would you expect the request to the second to silently redirect to the first?

Because they're the same range, just written differently. The low-order bits are dont-cares.

In T298655#7599988, @Majavah wrote:

On the other hand, User:2A01:4C8:1488:8B62:0:0:0:0/64 and User:2A01:4C8:1488:8B62:F997:1338:1555:BB9F/64 are both valid separate page titles in the User: namespace.

Usernames are just strings, with no semantics attached to them. IP addresses used for blocks and log queries do have semantics such as encoding CIDR ranges, and that should be honored.

In T298655#7599988, @Majavah wrote:

On the other hand, User:2A01:4C8:1488:8B62:0:0:0:0/64 and User:2A01:4C8:1488:8B62:F997:1338:1555:BB9F/64 are both valid separate page titles in the User: namespace.

Yes, the "/64" in this case is just a subpage name and has no special meaning. You could write "/256" or "/xyz" as well, all valid names. This is actually a separate issue (inability to deliver talk page messages to IP ranges) but not relevant to this task.