We previously used FILENAME_PRIVATE identifiers mostly for
identifiers exposed only to the unit tests... but also for
identifiers exposed to the benchmarker, and sometimes for
identifiers exposed to a similar module, and occasionally for no
really good reason at all.
Now, we use FILENAME_PRIVATE identifiers for identifiers shared by
Tor and the unit tests. They should be defined static when we
aren't building the unit test, and globally visible otherwise. (The
STATIC macro will keep us honest here.)
For identifiers used only by the unit tests and never by Tor at all,
on the other hand, we wrap them in #ifdef TOR_UNIT_TESTS.
This is not the motivating use case for the split test/non-test
build system; it's just a test example to see how it works, and to
take a chance to clean up the code a little.
This is good enough to give P_success >= 999,999,999/1,000,000,000 so
long as the address space is less than 97.95 full. It'd be ridiculous
for that to happen for IPv6, and usome reasonable assumptions, it
would also be pretty silly for IPv4.
With an IPv6 virtual address map, we can basically hand out a new
IPv6 address for _every_ address we connect to. That'll be cool, and
will let us maybe get around prop205 issues.
This uses some fancy logic to try to make the code paths in the ipv4
and the ipv6 case as close as possible, and moves to randomly
generated addresses so we don't need to maintain those stupid counters
that will collide if Tor restarts but apps don't.
Also has some XXXX items to fix to make this useful. More design
needed.
(This is part 2 of making DNS cache use enabled/disabled on a
per-client port basis. This implements the CacheIPv[46]DNS options,
but not the UseCachedIPv[46] ones.)
This makes it so we can handle getting an IPv6 in the 3 different
formats we specified it for in RESOLVED cells,
END_STREAM_REASON_EXITPOLICY cells, and CONNECTED cells.
We don't cache IPv6 addresses yet, since proposal 205 isn't
implemented.
There's a refactored function for parsing connected cells; it has unit
tests.
We'd like these functions to be circuit-relative so that we can
implement a per-circuit DNS cache and per-circuit DNS cache rules for
proposal 205 or its successors. I'm doing this now, as a part of the
IPv6 exits code, since there are about to be a few more instances
of code using this.
