diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'src/lib/eval/tests/token_unittest.cc')
| -rw-r--r-- | src/lib/eval/tests/token_unittest.cc | 3479 |
1 files changed, 3479 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/src/lib/eval/tests/token_unittest.cc b/src/lib/eval/tests/token_unittest.cc new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c186658 --- /dev/null +++ b/src/lib/eval/tests/token_unittest.cc @@ -0,0 +1,3479 @@ +// Copyright (C) 2015-2022 Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ("ISC") +// +// This Source Code Form is subject to the terms of the Mozilla Public +// License, v. 2.0. If a copy of the MPL was not distributed with this +// file, You can obtain one at http://mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/. + +#include <config.h> +#include <fstream> +#include <eval/token.h> +#include <eval/eval_context.h> +#include <dhcp/pkt4.h> +#include <dhcp/pkt6.h> +#include <dhcp/dhcp4.h> +#include <dhcp/dhcp6.h> +#include <dhcp/option_string.h> +#include <dhcp/option_vendor.h> +#include <dhcp/option_vendor_class.h> +#include <log/logger_manager.h> +#include <log/logger_name.h> +#include <log/logger_support.h> +#include <testutils/log_utils.h> + +#include <boost/algorithm/string/classification.hpp> +#include <boost/algorithm/string/constants.hpp> +#include <boost/algorithm/string/split.hpp> +#include <boost/shared_ptr.hpp> +#include <boost/scoped_ptr.hpp> +#include <gtest/gtest.h> + +#include <arpa/inet.h> + +using namespace std; +using namespace isc::dhcp; +using namespace isc::asiolink; +using namespace isc::log; +using namespace isc::dhcp::test; + +namespace { + +/// @brief Test fixture for testing Tokens. +/// +/// This class provides several convenience objects to be used during testing +/// of the Token family of classes. + +class TokenTest : public LogContentTest { +public: + + /// @brief Initializes Pkt4, Pkt6 and options that can be useful for + /// evaluation tests. + TokenTest() { + pkt4_.reset(new Pkt4(DHCPDISCOVER, 12345)); + pkt6_.reset(new Pkt6(DHCPV6_SOLICIT, 12345)); + + // Add options with easily identifiable strings in them + option_str4_.reset(new OptionString(Option::V4, 100, "hundred4")); + option_str6_.reset(new OptionString(Option::V6, 100, "hundred6")); + + pkt4_->addOption(option_str4_); + pkt6_->addOption(option_str6_); + + // Change this to true if you need extra information about logging + // checks to be printed. + logCheckVerbose(false); + } + + /// @brief Inserts RAI option with several suboptions + /// + /// The structure inserted is: + /// - RAI (option 82) + /// - option 1 (containing string "one") + /// - option 13 (containing string "thirteen") + void insertRelay4Option() { + + // RAI (Relay Agent Information) option + OptionPtr rai(new Option(Option::V4, DHO_DHCP_AGENT_OPTIONS)); + OptionPtr sub1(new OptionString(Option::V4, 1, "one")); + OptionPtr sub13(new OptionString(Option::V4, 13, "thirteen")); + + rai->addOption(sub1); + rai->addOption(sub13); + pkt4_->addOption(rai); + } + + /// @brief Adds relay encapsulations with some suboptions + /// + /// This will add 2 relay encapsulations all will have + /// msg_type of RELAY_FORW + /// Relay 0 (closest to server) will have + /// linkaddr = peeraddr = 0, hop-count = 1 + /// option 100 "hundred.zero", option 101 "hundredone.zero" + /// Relay 1 (closest to client) will have + /// linkaddr 1::1= peeraddr = 1::2, hop-count = 0 + /// option 100 "hundred.one", option 102 "hundredtwo.one" + void addRelay6Encapsulations() { + // First relay + Pkt6::RelayInfo relay0; + relay0.msg_type_ = DHCPV6_RELAY_FORW; + relay0.hop_count_ = 1; + relay0.linkaddr_ = isc::asiolink::IOAddress("::"); + relay0.peeraddr_ = isc::asiolink::IOAddress("::"); + OptionPtr optRelay01(new OptionString(Option::V6, 100, + "hundred.zero")); + OptionPtr optRelay02(new OptionString(Option::V6, 101, + "hundredone.zero")); + + relay0.options_.insert(make_pair(optRelay01->getType(), optRelay01)); + relay0.options_.insert(make_pair(optRelay02->getType(), optRelay02)); + + pkt6_->addRelayInfo(relay0); + // Second relay + Pkt6::RelayInfo relay1; + relay1.msg_type_ = DHCPV6_RELAY_FORW; + relay1.hop_count_ = 0; + relay1.linkaddr_ = isc::asiolink::IOAddress("1::1"); + relay1.peeraddr_ = isc::asiolink::IOAddress("1::2"); + OptionPtr optRelay11(new OptionString(Option::V6, 100, + "hundred.one")); + OptionPtr optRelay12(new OptionString(Option::V6, 102, + "hundredtwo.one")); + + relay1.options_.insert(make_pair(optRelay11->getType(), optRelay11)); + relay1.options_.insert(make_pair(optRelay12->getType(), optRelay12)); + pkt6_->addRelayInfo(relay1); + } + + /// @brief Verify that the relay6 option evaluations work properly + /// + /// Given the nesting level and option code extract the option + /// and compare it to the expected string. + /// + /// @param test_level The nesting level + /// @param test_code The code of the option to extract + /// @param result_addr The expected result of the address as a string + void verifyRelay6Option(const int8_t test_level, + const uint16_t test_code, + const TokenOption::RepresentationType& test_rep, + const std::string& result_string) { + // Create the token + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenRelay6Option(test_level, + test_code, + test_rep))); + + // We should be able to evaluate it + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + + // We should have one value on the stack + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + + // And it should match the expected result + // Invalid nesting levels result in a 0 length string + EXPECT_EQ(result_string, values_.top()); + + // Then we clear the stack + clearStack(); + } + + /// @brief Verify that the relay6 field evaluations work properly + /// + /// Given the nesting level, the field to extract and the expected + /// address create a token and evaluate it then compare the addresses + /// + /// @param test_level The nesting level + /// @param test_field The type of the field to extract + /// @param result_addr The expected result of the address as a string + void verifyRelay6Eval(const int8_t test_level, + const TokenRelay6Field::FieldType test_field, + const int result_len, + const uint8_t result_addr[]) { + // Create the token + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenRelay6Field(test_level, test_field))); + + // We should be able to evaluate it + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + + // We should have one value on the stack + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + + // And it should match the expected result + // Invalid nesting levels result in a 0 length string + EXPECT_EQ(result_len, values_.top().size()); + if (result_len != 0) { + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(result_addr, &values_.top()[0], result_len)); + } + + // Then we clear the stack + clearStack(); + } + + /// @brief Convenience function. Removes token and values stacks. + /// @param token specifies if the convenience token should be removed or not + void clearStack(bool token = true) { + while (!values_.empty()) { + values_.pop(); + } + if (token) { + t_.reset(); + } + } + + /// @brief Aux. function that stores integer values as 4 byte string. + /// + /// @param value integer value to be stored + /// @return 4 byte long string with encoded value. + string encode(uint32_t value) { + return EvalContext::fromUint32(value); + } + + TokenPtr t_; ///< Just a convenience pointer + + ValueStack values_; ///< evaluated values will be stored here + + Pkt4Ptr pkt4_; ///< A stub DHCPv4 packet + Pkt6Ptr pkt6_; ///< A stub DHCPv6 packet + + OptionPtr option_str4_; ///< A string option for DHCPv4 + OptionPtr option_str6_; ///< A string option for DHCPv6 + + OptionVendorPtr vendor_; ///< Vendor option used during tests + OptionVendorClassPtr vendor_class_; ///< Vendor class option used during tests + + /// @brief Verify that the substring eval works properly + /// + /// This function takes the parameters and sets up the value + /// stack then executes the eval and checks the results. + /// + /// @param test_string The string to operate on + /// @param test_start The position to start when getting a substring + /// @param test_length The length of the substring to get + /// @param result_string The expected result of the eval + /// @param should_throw The eval will throw + void verifySubstringEval(const std::string& test_string, + const std::string& test_start, + const std::string& test_length, + const std::string& result_string, + bool should_throw = false) { + + // create the token + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenSubstring())); + + // push values on stack + values_.push(test_string); + values_.push(test_start); + values_.push(test_length); + + // evaluate the token + if (should_throw) { + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + ASSERT_EQ(0, values_.size()); + } else { + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // verify results + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ(result_string, values_.top()); + + // remove result + values_.pop(); + } + } + + /// @brief Verify that the split eval works properly + /// + /// This function takes the parameters and sets up the value + /// stack then executes the eval and checks the results. + /// + /// @param test_string The string to operate on + /// @param test_delimiters The string of delimiter characters to split upon + /// @param test_field The field number of the desired field + /// @param result_string The expected result of the eval + /// @param should_throw The eval will throw + void verifySplitEval(const std::string& test_string, + const std::string& test_delimiters, + const std::string& test_field, + const std::string& result_string, + bool should_throw = false) { + // create the token + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenSplit())); + + // push values on stack + values_.push(test_string); + values_.push(test_delimiters); + values_.push(test_field); + + // evaluate the token + if (should_throw) { + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + ASSERT_EQ(0, values_.size()); + } else { + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // verify results + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ(result_string, values_.top()); + + // remove result + values_.pop(); + } + } + + /// @brief Creates vendor-option with specified value and adds it to packet + /// + /// This method creates specified vendor option, removes any existing + /// vendor options and adds the new one to v4 or v6 packet. + /// + /// @param u universe (V4 or V6) + /// @param vendor_id specifies enterprise-id value. + void setVendorOption(Option::Universe u, uint32_t vendor_id) { + vendor_.reset(new OptionVendor(u, vendor_id)); + switch (u) { + case Option::V4: + pkt4_->delOption(DHO_VIVSO_SUBOPTIONS); + pkt4_->addOption(vendor_); + break; + case Option::V6: + pkt6_->delOption(D6O_VENDOR_OPTS); + pkt6_->addOption(vendor_); + break; + } + } + + /// @brief Creates vendor-class option with specified values and adds it to packet + /// + /// This method creates specified vendor-class option, removes any existing + /// vendor class options and adds the new one to v4 or v6 packet. + /// It also creates data tuples with greek alphabet names. + /// + /// @param u universe (V4 or V6) + /// @param vendor_id specifies enterprise-id value. + /// @param tuples_size number of data tuples to create. + void setVendorClassOption(Option::Universe u, uint32_t vendor_id, + size_t tuples_size = 0) { + // Create the option first. + vendor_class_.reset(new OptionVendorClass(u, vendor_id)); + + // Now let's add specified number of data tuples + OpaqueDataTuple::LengthFieldType len = (u == Option::V4?OpaqueDataTuple::LENGTH_1_BYTE: + OpaqueDataTuple::LENGTH_2_BYTES); + const char* content[] = { "alpha", "beta", "delta", "gamma", "epsilon", + "zeta", "eta", "theta", "iota", "kappa" }; + const size_t nb_content = sizeof(content) / sizeof(char*); + ASSERT_TRUE(tuples_size < nb_content); + for (size_t i = 0; i < tuples_size; ++i) { + OpaqueDataTuple tuple(len); + tuple.assign(string(content[i])); + if (u == Option::V4 && i == 0) { + // vendor-class for v4 has a peculiar quirk. The first tuple is being + // added, even if there's no data at all. + vendor_class_->setTuple(0, tuple); + } else { + vendor_class_->addTuple(tuple); + } + } + + switch (u) { + case Option::V4: + pkt4_->delOption(DHO_VIVCO_SUBOPTIONS); + pkt4_->addOption(vendor_class_); + break; + case Option::V6: + pkt6_->delOption(D6O_VENDOR_CLASS); + pkt6_->addOption(vendor_class_); + break; + } + } + + /// @brief Auxiliary function that evaluates tokens and checks result + /// + /// Depending on the universe, either pkt4_ or pkt6_ are supposed to have + /// all the necessary values and options set. The result is checked + /// on the values_ stack. + /// + /// @param u universe (V4 or V6) + /// @param expected_result text representation of the expected outcome + void evaluate(Option::Universe u, std::string expected_result) { + switch (u) { + case Option::V4: + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + break; + case Option::V6: + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + break; + default: + ADD_FAILURE() << "Invalid universe specified."; + } + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ(expected_result, values_.top()); + } + + /// @brief Tests if vendor token behaves properly. + /// + /// @param u universe (V4 or V6) + /// @param token_vendor_id enterprise-id used in the token + /// @param option_vendor_id enterprise-id used in option (0 means don't + /// create the option) + /// @param expected_result text representation of the expected outcome + void testVendorExists(Option::Universe u, uint32_t token_vendor_id, + uint32_t option_vendor_id, + const std::string& expected_result) { + // Let's clear any old values, so we can run multiple cases in each test + clearStack(); + + // Create the token + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenVendor(u, token_vendor_id, + TokenOption::EXISTS))); + + // If specified option is non-zero, create it. + if (option_vendor_id) { + setVendorOption(u, option_vendor_id); + } + + evaluate(u, expected_result); + } + + /// @brief Tests if vendor token properly returns enterprise-id. + /// + /// @param u universe (V4 or V6) + /// @param option_vendor_id enterprise-id used in option (0 means don't + /// create the option) + /// @param expected_result text representation of the expected outcome + void testVendorEnterprise(Option::Universe u, uint32_t option_vendor_id, + const std::string& expected_result) { + // Let's clear any old values, so we can run multiple cases in each test + clearStack(); + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenVendor(u, 0, TokenVendor::ENTERPRISE_ID))); + if (option_vendor_id) { + setVendorOption(u, option_vendor_id); + } + + evaluate(u, expected_result); + } + + /// @brief Tests if vendor class token properly returns enterprise-id. + /// + /// @param u universe (V4 or V6) + /// @param option_vendor_id enterprise-id used in option (0 means don't + /// create the option) + /// @param expected_result text representation of the expected outcome + void testVendorClassEnterprise(Option::Universe u, uint32_t option_vendor_id, + const std::string& expected_result) { + // Let's clear any old values, so we can run multiple cases in each test + clearStack(); + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenVendorClass(u, 0, TokenVendor::ENTERPRISE_ID))); + if (option_vendor_id) { + setVendorClassOption(u, option_vendor_id); + } + + evaluate(u, expected_result); + } + + /// @brief Tests if vendor class token can report existence properly. + /// + /// @param u universe (V4 or V6) + /// @param token_vendor_id enterprise-id used in the token + /// @param option_vendor_id enterprise-id used in option (0 means don't + /// create the option) + /// @param expected_result text representation of the expected outcome + void testVendorClassExists(Option::Universe u, uint32_t token_vendor_id, + uint32_t option_vendor_id, + const std::string& expected_result) { + // Let's clear any old values, so we can run multiple cases in each test + clearStack(); + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenVendorClass(u, token_vendor_id, + TokenOption::EXISTS))); + + if (option_vendor_id) { + setVendorClassOption(u, option_vendor_id); + } + + evaluate(u, expected_result); + } + + /// @brief Tests if vendor token can handle sub-options properly. + /// + /// @param u universe (V4 or V6) + /// @param token_vendor_id enterprise-id used in the token + /// @param token_option_code option code in the token + /// @param option_vendor_id enterprise-id used in option (0 means don't + /// create the option) + /// @param option_code sub-option code (0 means don't create suboption) + /// @param repr representation (TokenOption::EXISTS or HEXADECIMAL) + /// @param expected_result text representation of the expected outcome + void testVendorSuboption(Option::Universe u, + uint32_t token_vendor_id, uint16_t token_option_code, + uint32_t option_vendor_id, uint16_t option_code, + TokenOption::RepresentationType repr, + const std::string& expected) { + // Let's clear any old values, so we can run multiple cases in each test + clearStack(); + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenVendor(u, token_vendor_id, repr, + token_option_code))); + if (option_vendor_id) { + setVendorOption(u, option_vendor_id); + if (option_code) { + ASSERT_TRUE(vendor_); + OptionPtr subopt(new OptionString(u, option_code, "alpha")); + vendor_->addOption(subopt); + } + } + + evaluate(u, expected); + } + + /// @brief Tests if vendor class token can handle data chunks properly. + /// + /// @param u universe (V4 or V6) + /// @param token_vendor_id enterprise-id used in the token + /// @param token_index data index used in the token + /// @param option_vendor_id enterprise-id used in option (0 means don't + /// create the option) + /// @param data_tuples number of data tuples in the option + /// @param expected_result text representation of the expected outcome + void testVendorClassData(Option::Universe u, + uint32_t token_vendor_id, uint16_t token_index, + uint32_t option_vendor_id, uint16_t data_tuples, + const std::string& expected) { + // Let's clear any old values, so we can run multiple cases in each test + clearStack(); + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenVendorClass(u, token_vendor_id, + TokenVendor::DATA, token_index))); + if (option_vendor_id) { + setVendorClassOption(u, option_vendor_id, data_tuples); + } + + evaluate(u, expected); + } + + /// @brief Tests if TokenInteger evaluates to the proper value + /// + /// @param expected expected string representation on stack after evaluation + /// @param value integer value passed to constructor + void testInteger(const std::string& expected, uint32_t value) { + + clearStack(); + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenInteger(value))); + + // The universe (v4 or v6) shouldn't have any impact on this, + // but let's check it anyway. + evaluate(Option::V4, expected); + + clearStack(false); + evaluate(Option::V6, expected); + + clearStack(true); + } +}; + +// This tests the toBool() conversions +TEST_F(TokenTest, toBool) { + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(Token::toBool("true")); + EXPECT_TRUE(Token::toBool("true")); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(Token::toBool("false")); + EXPECT_FALSE(Token::toBool("false")); + + // Token::toBool() is case-sensitive + EXPECT_THROW(Token::toBool("True"), EvalTypeError); + EXPECT_THROW(Token::toBool("TRUE"), EvalTypeError); + + // Proposed aliases + EXPECT_THROW(Token::toBool("1"), EvalTypeError); + EXPECT_THROW(Token::toBool("0"), EvalTypeError); + EXPECT_THROW(Token::toBool(""), EvalTypeError); +} + +// This simple test checks that a TokenString, representing a constant string, +// can be used in Pkt4 evaluation. (The actual packet is not used) +TEST_F(TokenTest, string4) { + + // Store constant string "foo" in the TokenString object. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenString("foo"))); + + // Make sure that the token can be evaluated without exceptions. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("foo", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_STRING Pushing text string 'foo'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This simple test checks that a TokenString, representing a constant string, +// can be used in Pkt6 evaluation. (The actual packet is not used) +TEST_F(TokenTest, string6) { + + // Store constant string "foo" in the TokenString object. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenString("foo"))); + + // Make sure that the token can be evaluated without exceptions. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("foo", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_STRING Pushing text string 'foo'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This simple test checks that a TokenHexString, representing a constant +// string coded in hexadecimal, can be used in Pkt4 evaluation. +// (The actual packet is not used) +TEST_F(TokenTest, hexstring4) { + TokenPtr empty; + TokenPtr bad; + TokenPtr nodigit; + TokenPtr baddigit; + TokenPtr bell; + TokenPtr foo; + TokenPtr cookie; + + // Store constant empty hexstring "" ("") in the TokenHexString object. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(empty.reset(new TokenHexString(""))); + // Store bad encoded hexstring "0abc" (""). + ASSERT_NO_THROW(bad.reset(new TokenHexString("0abc"))); + // Store hexstring with no digits "0x" (""). + ASSERT_NO_THROW(nodigit.reset(new TokenHexString("0x"))); + // Store hexstring with a bad hexdigit "0xxabc" (""). + ASSERT_NO_THROW(baddigit.reset(new TokenHexString("0xxabc"))); + // Store hexstring with an odd number of hexdigits "0x7" ("\a"). + ASSERT_NO_THROW(bell.reset(new TokenHexString("0x7"))); + // Store constant hexstring "0x666f6f" ("foo"). + ASSERT_NO_THROW(foo.reset(new TokenHexString("0x666f6f"))); + // Store constant hexstring "0x63825363" (DHCP_OPTIONS_COOKIE). + ASSERT_NO_THROW(cookie.reset(new TokenHexString("0x63825363"))); + + // Make sure that tokens can be evaluated without exceptions, + // and verify the debug output + ASSERT_NO_THROW(empty->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(bad->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(nodigit->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(baddigit->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(bell->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(foo->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(cookie->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(7, values_.size()); + uint32_t expected = htonl(DHCP_OPTIONS_COOKIE); + EXPECT_EQ(4, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(&expected, &values_.top()[0], 4)); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ("foo", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ("\a", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_HEXSTRING Pushing hex string 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_HEXSTRING Pushing hex string 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_HEXSTRING Pushing hex string 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_HEXSTRING Pushing hex string 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_HEXSTRING Pushing hex string 0x07"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_HEXSTRING Pushing hex string 0x666F6F"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_HEXSTRING Pushing hex string 0x63825363"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This simple test checks that a TokenHexString, representing a constant +// string coded in hexadecimal, can be used in Pkt6 evaluation. +// (The actual packet is not used) +TEST_F(TokenTest, hexstring6) { + TokenPtr empty; + TokenPtr bad; + TokenPtr nodigit; + TokenPtr baddigit; + TokenPtr bell; + TokenPtr foo; + TokenPtr cookie; + + // Store constant empty hexstring "" ("") in the TokenHexString object. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(empty.reset(new TokenHexString(""))); + // Store bad encoded hexstring "0abc" (""). + ASSERT_NO_THROW(bad.reset(new TokenHexString("0abc"))); + // Store hexstring with no digits "0x" (""). + ASSERT_NO_THROW(nodigit.reset(new TokenHexString("0x"))); + // Store hexstring with a bad hexdigit "0xxabc" (""). + ASSERT_NO_THROW(baddigit.reset(new TokenHexString("0xxabc"))); + // Store hexstring with an odd number of hexdigits "0x7" ("\a"). + ASSERT_NO_THROW(bell.reset(new TokenHexString("0x7"))); + // Store constant hexstring "0x666f6f" ("foo"). + ASSERT_NO_THROW(foo.reset(new TokenHexString("0x666f6f"))); + // Store constant hexstring "0x63825363" (DHCP_OPTIONS_COOKIE). + ASSERT_NO_THROW(cookie.reset(new TokenHexString("0x63825363"))); + + // Make sure that tokens can be evaluated without exceptions. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(empty->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(bad->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(nodigit->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(baddigit->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(bell->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(foo->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(cookie->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(7, values_.size()); + uint32_t expected = htonl(DHCP_OPTIONS_COOKIE); + EXPECT_EQ(4, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(&expected, &values_.top()[0], 4)); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ("foo", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ("\a", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_HEXSTRING Pushing hex string 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_HEXSTRING Pushing hex string 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_HEXSTRING Pushing hex string 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_HEXSTRING Pushing hex string 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_HEXSTRING Pushing hex string 0x07"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_HEXSTRING Pushing hex string 0x666F6F"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_HEXSTRING Pushing hex string 0x63825363"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks that a TokenIpAddress, representing an IP address as +// a constant string, can be used in Pkt4/Pkt6 evaluation. +// (The actual packet is not used) +TEST_F(TokenTest, ipaddress) { + TokenPtr bad4; + TokenPtr bad6; + TokenPtr ip4; + TokenPtr ip6; + + // Bad IP addresses + ASSERT_NO_THROW(bad4.reset(new TokenIpAddress("10.0.0.0.1"))); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(bad6.reset(new TokenIpAddress(":::"))); + + // IP addresses + ASSERT_NO_THROW(ip4.reset(new TokenIpAddress("10.0.0.1"))); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(ip6.reset(new TokenIpAddress("2001:db8::1"))); + + // Make sure that tokens can be evaluated without exceptions. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(ip4->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(ip6->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(bad4->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(bad6->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(4, values_.size()); + + // Check bad addresses (they pushed '' on the value stack) + EXPECT_EQ(0, values_.top().size()); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ(0, values_.top().size()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check IPv6 address + uint8_t expected6[] = { 0x20, 1, 0xd, 0xb8, 0, 0, 0, 0, + 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1 }; + EXPECT_EQ(16, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(expected6, &values_.top()[0], 16)); + values_.pop(); + + // Check IPv4 address + uint8_t expected4[] = { 10, 0, 0, 1 }; + EXPECT_EQ(4, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(expected4, &values_.top()[0], 4)); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_IPADDRESS Pushing IPAddress 0x0A000001"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_IPADDRESS Pushing IPAddress " + "0x20010DB8000000000000000000000001"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_IPADDRESS Pushing IPAddress 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_IPADDRESS Pushing IPAddress 0x"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks that a TokenIpAddressToText, representing an IP address as +// a string, can be used in Pkt4/Pkt6 evaluation. +// (The actual packet is not used) +TEST_F(TokenTest, addressToText) { + TokenPtr address((new TokenIpAddressToText())); + std::vector<uint8_t> bytes; + + std::string value = "10.0.0.1"; + values_.push(value); + + // Invalid data size fails. + EXPECT_THROW(address->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + + bytes = IOAddress(value).toBytes(); + values_.push(std::string(bytes.begin(), bytes.end())); + + EXPECT_NO_THROW(address->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + + value = "2001:db8::1"; + bytes = IOAddress(value).toBytes(); + values_.push(std::string(bytes.begin(), bytes.end())); + + EXPECT_NO_THROW(address->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(2, values_.size()); + + values_.push(std::string()); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(address->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(3, values_.size()); + + // Check empty data + EXPECT_EQ(0, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check IPv6 address + EXPECT_EQ(11, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("2001:db8::1", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check IPv4 address + EXPECT_EQ(8, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("10.0.0.1", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_IPADDRESSTOTEXT Pushing IPAddress 10.0.0.1"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_IPADDRESSTOTEXT Pushing IPAddress 2001:db8::1"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks that a TokenIntToText, representing an integer as a string, +// can be used in Pkt4/Pkt6 evaluation. +// (The actual packet is not used) +TEST_F(TokenTest, integerToText) { + TokenPtr int8token((new TokenInt8ToText())); + TokenPtr int16token((new TokenInt16ToText())); + TokenPtr int32token((new TokenInt32ToText())); + TokenPtr uint8token((new TokenUInt8ToText())); + TokenPtr uint16token((new TokenUInt16ToText())); + TokenPtr uint32token((new TokenUInt32ToText())); + + std::vector<uint8_t> bytes; + std::string value = "0123456789"; + + // Invalid data size fails. + values_.push(value); + EXPECT_THROW(int8token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + values_.push(value); + EXPECT_THROW(int16token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + values_.push(value); + EXPECT_THROW(int32token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + values_.push(value); + EXPECT_THROW(uint8token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + values_.push(value); + EXPECT_THROW(uint16token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + values_.push(value); + EXPECT_THROW(uint32token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + + uint64_t data = -1; + + values_.push(std::string(const_cast<const char *>(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&data)), sizeof(int8_t))); + + EXPECT_NO_THROW(int8token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + + values_.push(std::string(const_cast<const char *>(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&data)), sizeof(int16_t))); + + EXPECT_NO_THROW(int16token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(2, values_.size()); + + values_.push(std::string(const_cast<const char *>(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&data)), sizeof(int32_t))); + + EXPECT_NO_THROW(int32token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(3, values_.size()); + + values_.push(std::string(const_cast<const char *>(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&data)), sizeof(uint8_t))); + + EXPECT_NO_THROW(uint8token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(4, values_.size()); + + values_.push(std::string(const_cast<const char *>(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&data)), sizeof(uint16_t))); + + EXPECT_NO_THROW(uint16token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(5, values_.size()); + + values_.push(std::string(const_cast<const char *>(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&data)), sizeof(uint32_t))); + + EXPECT_NO_THROW(uint32token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(6, values_.size()); + + value = ""; + + values_.push(value); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(int8token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(7, values_.size()); + + values_.push(value); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(int16token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(8, values_.size()); + + values_.push(value); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(int32token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(9, values_.size()); + + values_.push(value); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(uint8token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(10, values_.size()); + + values_.push(value); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(uint16token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(11, values_.size()); + + values_.push(value); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(uint32token->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check that the evaluation put its value on the values stack. + ASSERT_EQ(12, values_.size()); + + // Check empty data + EXPECT_EQ(0, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check empty data + EXPECT_EQ(0, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check empty data + EXPECT_EQ(0, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check empty data + EXPECT_EQ(0, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check empty data + EXPECT_EQ(0, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check empty data + EXPECT_EQ(0, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check uint32 + EXPECT_EQ(10, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("4294967295", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check uint16 + EXPECT_EQ(5, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("65535", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check uint8 + EXPECT_EQ(3, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("255", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check int32 + EXPECT_EQ(2, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("-1", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check int16 + EXPECT_EQ(2, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("-1", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check int8 + EXPECT_EQ(2, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ("-1", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_INT8TOTEXT Pushing Int8 -1"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_INT16TOTEXT Pushing Int16 -1"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_INT32TOTEXT Pushing Int32 -1"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_UINT8TOTEXT Pushing UInt8 255"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_UINT16TOTEXT Pushing UInt16 65535"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_UINT32TOTEXT Pushing UInt32 4294967295"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an option value is able to extract +// the option from an IPv4 packet and properly store the option's value. +TEST_F(TokenTest, optionString4) { + TokenPtr found; + TokenPtr not_found; + + // The packets we use have option 100 with a string in them. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(found.reset(new TokenOption(100, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(not_found.reset(new TokenOption(101, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + + // This should evaluate to the content of the option 100 (i.e. "hundred4") + ASSERT_NO_THROW(found->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // This should evaluate to "" as there is no option 101. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(not_found->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // There should be 2 values evaluated. + ASSERT_EQ(2, values_.size()); + + // This is a stack, so the pop order is inversed. We should get the empty + // string first. + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Then the content of the option 100. + EXPECT_EQ("hundred4", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 100 with value 'hundred4'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 101 with value ''"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing option value is able to extract +// the option from an IPv4 packet and properly store its value in a +// hexadecimal format. +TEST_F(TokenTest, optionHexString4) { + TokenPtr found; + TokenPtr not_found; + + // The packets we use have option 100 with a string in them. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(found.reset(new TokenOption(100, TokenOption::HEXADECIMAL))); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(not_found.reset(new TokenOption(101, TokenOption::HEXADECIMAL))); + + // This should evaluate to the content of the option 100 (i.e. "hundred4") + ASSERT_NO_THROW(found->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // This should evaluate to "" as there is no option 101. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(not_found->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // There should be 2 values evaluated. + ASSERT_EQ(2, values_.size()); + + // This is a stack, so the pop order is inversed. We should get the empty + // string first. + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Then the content of the option 100. + EXPECT_EQ("hundred4", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 100 with value 0x68756E6472656434"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 101 with value 0x"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an option value is able to check +// the existence of the option from an IPv4 packet. +TEST_F(TokenTest, optionExistsString4) { + TokenPtr found; + TokenPtr not_found; + + // The packets we use have option 100 with a string in them. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(found.reset(new TokenOption(100, TokenOption::EXISTS))); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(not_found.reset(new TokenOption(101, TokenOption::EXISTS))); + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(found->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(not_found->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // There should be 2 values evaluated. + ASSERT_EQ(2, values_.size()); + + // This is a stack, so the pop order is inversed. + EXPECT_EQ("false", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ("true", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 100 with value 'true'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 101 with value 'false'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an option value is able to extract +// the option from an IPv6 packet and properly store the option's value. +TEST_F(TokenTest, optionString6) { + TokenPtr found; + TokenPtr not_found; + + // The packets we use have option 100 with a string in them. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(found.reset(new TokenOption(100, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(not_found.reset(new TokenOption(101, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + + // This should evaluate to the content of the option 100 (i.e. "hundred6") + ASSERT_NO_THROW(found->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + + // This should evaluate to "" as there is no option 101. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(not_found->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + + // There should be 2 values evaluated. + ASSERT_EQ(2, values_.size()); + + // This is a stack, so the pop order is inversed. We should get the empty + // string first. + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Then the content of the option 100. + EXPECT_EQ("hundred6", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 100 with value 'hundred6'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 101 with value ''"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an option value is able to extract +// the option from an IPv6 packet and properly store its value in hexadecimal +// format. +TEST_F(TokenTest, optionHexString6) { + TokenPtr found; + TokenPtr not_found; + + // The packets we use have option 100 with a string in them. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(found.reset(new TokenOption(100, TokenOption::HEXADECIMAL))); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(not_found.reset(new TokenOption(101, TokenOption::HEXADECIMAL))); + + // This should evaluate to the content of the option 100 (i.e. "hundred6") + ASSERT_NO_THROW(found->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + + // This should evaluate to "" as there is no option 101. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(not_found->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + + // There should be 2 values evaluated. + ASSERT_EQ(2, values_.size()); + + // This is a stack, so the pop order is inversed. We should get the empty + // string first. + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Then the content of the option 100. + EXPECT_EQ("hundred6", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 100 with value 0x68756E6472656436"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 101 with value 0x"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an option value is able to check +// the existence of the option from an IPv6 packet. +TEST_F(TokenTest, optionExistsString6) { + TokenPtr found; + TokenPtr not_found; + + // The packets we use have option 100 with a string in them. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(found.reset(new TokenOption(100, TokenOption::EXISTS))); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(not_found.reset(new TokenOption(101, TokenOption::EXISTS))); + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(found->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(not_found->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + + // There should be 2 values evaluated. + ASSERT_EQ(2, values_.size()); + + // This is a stack, so the pop order is inversed. + EXPECT_EQ("false", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + EXPECT_EQ("true", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 100 with value 'true'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 101 with value 'false'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks that the existing relay4 option can be found. +TEST_F(TokenTest, relay4Option) { + + // Insert relay option with sub-options 1 and 13 + insertRelay4Option(); + + // Creating the token should be safe. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenRelay4Option(13, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + + // We should be able to evaluate it. + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // we should have one value on the stack + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + + // The option should be found and relay4[13] should evaluate to the + // content of that sub-option, i.e. "thirteen" + EXPECT_EQ("thirteen", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 13 with value 'thirteen'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks that the code properly handles cases when +// there is a RAI option, but there's no requested sub-option. +TEST_F(TokenTest, relay4OptionNoSuboption) { + + // Insert relay option with sub-options 1 and 13 + insertRelay4Option(); + + // Creating the token should be safe. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenRelay4Option(15, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + + // We should be able to evaluate it. + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // we should have one value on the stack + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + + // The option should NOT be found (there is no sub-option 15), + // so the expression should evaluate to "" + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 15 with value ''"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks that the code properly handles cases when +// there's no RAI option at all. +TEST_F(TokenTest, relay4OptionNoRai) { + + // We didn't call insertRelay4Option(), so there's no RAI option. + + // Creating the token should be safe. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenRelay4Option(13, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + + // We should be able to evaluate it. + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // we should have one value on the stack + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + + // The option should NOT be found (there is no sub-option 13), + // so the expression should evaluate to "" + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 13 with value ''"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks that only the RAI is searched for the requested +// sub-option. +TEST_F(TokenTest, relay4RAIOnly) { + + // Insert relay option with sub-options 1 and 13 + insertRelay4Option(); + + // Add options 13 and 70 to the packet. + OptionPtr opt13(new OptionString(Option::V4, 13, "THIRTEEN")); + OptionPtr opt70(new OptionString(Option::V4, 70, "SEVENTY")); + pkt4_->addOption(opt13); + pkt4_->addOption(opt70); + + // The situation is as follows: + // Packet: + // - option 13 (containing "THIRTEEN") + // - option 82 (rai) + // - option 1 (containing "one") + // - option 13 (containing "thirteen") + + // Let's try to get option 13. It should get the one from RAI + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenRelay4Option(13, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("thirteen", values_.top()); + + // Try to get option 1. It should get the one from RAI + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenRelay4Option(1, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("one", values_.top()); + + // Try to get option 70. It should fail, as there's no such + // sub option in RAI. + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenRelay4Option(70, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + + // Try to check option 1. It should return "true" + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenRelay4Option(1, TokenOption::EXISTS))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("true", values_.top()); + + // Try to check option 70. It should return "false" + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenRelay4Option(70, TokenOption::EXISTS))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("false", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 13 with value 'thirteen'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 1 with value 'one'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 70 with value ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 1 with value 'true'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 70 with value 'false'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if we can properly extract an option +// from relay encapsulations. Our packet has two relay +// encapsulations. Both include a common option with the +// original message (option 100) and both include their +// own option (101 and 102). We attempt to extract the +// options and compare them to expected values. We also +// try to extract an option from an encapsulation +// that doesn't exist (level 2), this should result in an empty +// string. +TEST_F(TokenTest, relay6Option) { + // We start by adding a set of relay encapsulations to the + // basic v6 packet. + addRelay6Encapsulations(); + + // Then we work our way through the set of choices + // Level 0 both options it has and the check that + // the checking for an option it doesn't have results + // in an empty string. + verifyRelay6Option(0, 100, TokenOption::TEXTUAL, "hundred.zero"); + verifyRelay6Option(0, 100, TokenOption::EXISTS, "true"); + verifyRelay6Option(0, 101, TokenOption::TEXTUAL, "hundredone.zero"); + verifyRelay6Option(0, 102, TokenOption::TEXTUAL, ""); + verifyRelay6Option(0, 102, TokenOption::EXISTS, "false"); + + // Level 1, again both options it has and the one for level 0 + verifyRelay6Option(1, 100, TokenOption::TEXTUAL, "hundred.one"); + verifyRelay6Option(1, 101, TokenOption::TEXTUAL, ""); + verifyRelay6Option(1, 102, TokenOption::TEXTUAL, "hundredtwo.one"); + + // Level 2, no encapsulation so no options + verifyRelay6Option(2, 100, TokenOption::TEXTUAL, ""); + + // Level -1, the same as level 1 + verifyRelay6Option(-1, 100, TokenOption::TEXTUAL, "hundred.one"); + verifyRelay6Option(-1, 101, TokenOption::TEXTUAL, ""); + verifyRelay6Option(-1, 102, TokenOption::TEXTUAL, "hundredtwo.one"); + + // Level -2, the same as level 0 + verifyRelay6Option(-2, 100, TokenOption::TEXTUAL, "hundred.zero"); + verifyRelay6Option(-2, 100, TokenOption::EXISTS, "true"); + verifyRelay6Option(-2, 101, TokenOption::TEXTUAL, "hundredone.zero"); + verifyRelay6Option(-2, 102, TokenOption::TEXTUAL, ""); + verifyRelay6Option(-2, 102, TokenOption::EXISTS, "false"); + + // Level -3, no encapsulation so no options + verifyRelay6Option(-3, 100, TokenOption::TEXTUAL, ""); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 100 with value 'hundred.zero'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 100 with value 'true'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 101 with value 'hundredone.zero'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 102 with value ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 102 with value 'false'"); + + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 100 with value 'hundred.one'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 101 with value ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 102 with value 'hundredtwo.one'"); + + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 100 with value ''"); + + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 100 with value 'hundred.one'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 101 with value ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 102 with value 'hundredtwo.one'"); + + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 100 with value 'hundred.zero'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 100 with value 'true'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 101 with value 'hundredone.zero'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 102 with value ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 102 with value 'false'"); + + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 100 with value ''"); + + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Verifies that relay6 option requires DHCPv6 +TEST_F(TokenTest, relay6OptionError) { + // Create a relay6 option token + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenRelay6Option(0, 13, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + + // A DHCPv6 packet is required + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); +} + +// Verifies that DHCPv4 packet metadata can be extracted. +TEST_F(TokenTest, pkt4MetaData) { + pkt4_->setIface("eth0"); + pkt4_->setLocalAddr(IOAddress("10.0.0.1")); + pkt4_->setRemoteAddr(IOAddress("10.0.0.2")); + + // Check interface (expect eth0) + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt(TokenPkt::IFACE))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + ASSERT_EQ("eth0", values_.top()); + + // Check source (expect 10.0.0.2) + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt(TokenPkt::SRC))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + vector<uint8_t> a2 = IOAddress("10.0.0.2").toBytes(); + ASSERT_EQ(a2.size(), values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(&a2[0], &values_.top()[0], a2.size())); + + // Check destination (expect 10.0.0.1) + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt(TokenPkt::DST))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + vector<uint8_t> a1 = IOAddress("10.0.0.1").toBytes(); + ASSERT_EQ(a1.size(), values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(&a1[0], &values_.top()[0], a1.size())); + + // Check length (expect 249) + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt(TokenPkt::LEN))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + uint32_t length = htonl(static_cast<uint32_t>(pkt4_->len())); + ASSERT_EQ(4, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(&length, &values_.top()[0], 4)); + + // Unknown metadata type fails + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt(TokenPkt::MetadataType(100)))); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT Pushing PKT meta data iface with value eth0"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT Pushing PKT meta data src with value 0x0A000002"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT Pushing PKT meta data dst with value 0x0A000001"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT Pushing PKT meta data len with value 0x000000F9"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Verifies that DHCPv6 packet metadata can be extracted. +TEST_F(TokenTest, pkt6MetaData) { + pkt6_->setIface("eth0"); + pkt6_->setLocalAddr(IOAddress("ff02::1:2")); + pkt6_->setRemoteAddr(IOAddress("fe80::1234")); + + // Check interface (expect eth0) + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt(TokenPkt::IFACE))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + ASSERT_EQ("eth0", values_.top()); + + // Check source (expect fe80::1234) + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt(TokenPkt::SRC))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + ASSERT_EQ(16, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0xfe, static_cast<uint8_t>(values_.top()[0])); + EXPECT_EQ(0x80, static_cast<uint8_t>(values_.top()[1])); + for (unsigned i = 2; i < 14; ++i) { + EXPECT_EQ(0, values_.top()[i]); + } + EXPECT_EQ(0x12, values_.top()[14]); + EXPECT_EQ(0x34, values_.top()[15]); + + // Check destination (expect ff02::1:2) + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt(TokenPkt::DST))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + vector<uint8_t> ma = IOAddress("ff02::1:2").toBytes(); + ASSERT_EQ(ma.size(), values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(&ma[0], &values_.top()[0], ma.size())); + + // Check length (expect 16) + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt(TokenPkt::LEN))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + uint32_t length = htonl(static_cast<uint32_t>(pkt6_->len())); + ASSERT_EQ(4, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(&length, &values_.top()[0], 4)); + + // Unknown meta data type fails + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt(TokenPkt::MetadataType(100)))); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_), EvalTypeError); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT Pushing PKT meta data iface with value eth0"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT Pushing PKT meta data src with value " + "0xFE800000000000000000000000001234"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT Pushing PKT meta data dst with value " + "0xFF020000000000000000000000010002"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT Pushing PKT meta data len with value 0x00000010"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Verifies if the DHCPv4 packet fields can be extracted. +TEST_F(TokenTest, pkt4Fields) { + pkt4_->setGiaddr(IOAddress("192.0.2.1")); + pkt4_->setCiaddr(IOAddress("192.0.2.2")); + pkt4_->setYiaddr(IOAddress("192.0.2.3")); + pkt4_->setSiaddr(IOAddress("192.0.2.4")); + + // We're setting hardware address to uncommon (7 bytes rather than 6 and + // hardware type 123) HW address. We'll use it in hlen and htype checks. + HWAddrPtr hw(new HWAddr(HWAddr::fromText("01:02:03:04:05:06:07", 123))); + pkt4_->setHWAddr(hw); + + // Check hardware address field. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt4(TokenPkt4::CHADDR))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + uint8_t expected_hw[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 }; + ASSERT_EQ(7, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(expected_hw, &values_.top()[0], 7)); + + // Check hlen value field. + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt4(TokenPkt4::HLEN))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + ASSERT_EQ(4, values_.top().size()); + uint32_t expected_hlen = htonl(7); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(&expected_hlen, &values_.top()[0], 4)); + + // Check htype value. + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt4(TokenPkt4::HTYPE))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + ASSERT_EQ(4, values_.top().size()); + uint32_t expected_htype = htonl(123); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(&expected_htype, &values_.top()[0], 4)); + + // Check giaddr value. + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt4(TokenPkt4::GIADDR))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + uint8_t expected_addr[] = { 192, 0, 2, 1 }; + ASSERT_EQ(4, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(expected_addr, &values_.top()[0], 4)); + + // Check ciaddr value. + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt4(TokenPkt4::CIADDR))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + expected_addr[3] = 2; + ASSERT_EQ(4, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(expected_addr, &values_.top()[0], 4)); + + // Check yiaddr value. + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt4(TokenPkt4::YIADDR))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + expected_addr[3] = 3; + ASSERT_EQ(4, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(expected_addr, &values_.top()[0], 4)); + + // Check siaddr value. + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt4(TokenPkt4::SIADDR))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + expected_addr[3] = 4; + ASSERT_EQ(4, values_.top().size()); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(expected_addr, &values_.top()[0], 4)); + + // Check msgtype. + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt4(TokenPkt4::MSGTYPE))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + ASSERT_EQ(4, values_.top().size()); + string exp_msgtype = encode(DHCPDISCOVER); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(&exp_msgtype[0], &values_.top()[0], 4)); + + // Check transaction-id + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt4(TokenPkt4::TRANSID))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + ASSERT_EQ(4, values_.top().size()); + string exp_transid = encode(12345); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(&exp_transid[0], &values_.top()[0], 4)); + + // Check a DHCPv6 packet throws. + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt4(TokenPkt4::HLEN))); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_), EvalTypeError); + + // Unknown field fails + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt4(TokenPkt4::FieldType(100)))); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT4 Pushing PKT4 field mac with value 0x01020304050607"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT4 Pushing PKT4 field hlen with value 0x00000007"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT4 Pushing PKT4 field htype with value 0x0000007B"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT4 Pushing PKT4 field giaddr with value 0xC0000201"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT4 Pushing PKT4 field ciaddr with value 0xC0000202"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT4 Pushing PKT4 field yiaddr with value 0xC0000203"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT4 Pushing PKT4 field siaddr with value 0xC0000204"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT4 Pushing PKT4 field msgtype with value 0x00000001"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT4 Pushing PKT4 field transid with value 0x00003039"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Verifies if the DHCPv6 packet fields can be extracted. +TEST_F(TokenTest, pkt6Fields) { + // The default test creates a v6 DHCPV6_SOLICIT packet with a + // transaction id of 12345. + + // Check the message type + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt6(TokenPkt6::MSGTYPE))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + uint32_t expected = htonl(1); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(&expected, &values_.top()[0], 4)); + + // Check the transaction id field + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt6(TokenPkt6::TRANSID))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + expected = htonl(12345); + EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(&expected, &values_.top()[0], 4)); + + // Check that working with a v4 packet generates an error + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt6(TokenPkt6::TRANSID))); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + + // Unknown field fails + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenPkt6(TokenPkt6::FieldType(100)))); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_), EvalTypeError); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT6 Pushing PKT6 field msgtype with value 0x00000001"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_PKT6 Pushing PKT6 field transid with value 0x00003039"); + + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if we can properly extract the link and peer +// address fields from relay encapsulations. Our packet has +// two relay encapsulations. We attempt to extract the two +// fields from both of the encapsulations and compare them. +// We also try to extract one of the fields from an encapsulation +// that doesn't exist (level 2), this should result in an empty +// string. +TEST_F(TokenTest, relay6Field) { + // Values for the address results + uint8_t zeroaddr[] = { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, + 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 }; + uint8_t linkaddr[] = { 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, + 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1 }; + uint8_t peeraddr[] = { 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, + 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2 }; + + // We start by adding a set of relay encapsulations to the + // basic v6 packet. + addRelay6Encapsulations(); + + // Then we work our way through the set of choices + // Level 0 both link and peer address should be 0::0 + verifyRelay6Eval(0, TokenRelay6Field::LINKADDR, 16, zeroaddr); + verifyRelay6Eval(0, TokenRelay6Field::PEERADDR, 16, zeroaddr); + + // Level 1 link and peer should have different non-zero addresses + verifyRelay6Eval(1, TokenRelay6Field::LINKADDR, 16, linkaddr); + verifyRelay6Eval(1, TokenRelay6Field::PEERADDR, 16, peeraddr); + + // Level 2 has no encapsulation so the address should be zero length + verifyRelay6Eval(2, TokenRelay6Field::LINKADDR, 0, zeroaddr); + + // Level -1 is the same as level 1 + verifyRelay6Eval(-1, TokenRelay6Field::LINKADDR, 16, linkaddr); + verifyRelay6Eval(-1, TokenRelay6Field::PEERADDR, 16, peeraddr); + + // Level -2 is the same as level 0 + verifyRelay6Eval(-2, TokenRelay6Field::LINKADDR, 16, zeroaddr); + verifyRelay6Eval(-2, TokenRelay6Field::PEERADDR, 16, zeroaddr); + + // Level -3 has no encapsulation so the address should be zero length + verifyRelay6Eval(-3, TokenRelay6Field::LINKADDR, 0, zeroaddr); + + // Lets check that the layout of the address returned by the + // token matches that of the TokenIpAddress + TokenPtr trelay; + TokenPtr taddr; + TokenPtr tequal; + ASSERT_NO_THROW(trelay.reset(new TokenRelay6Field(1, TokenRelay6Field::LINKADDR))); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(taddr.reset(new TokenIpAddress("1::1"))); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(tequal.reset(new TokenEqual())); + + EXPECT_NO_THROW(trelay->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(taddr->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(tequal->evaluate(*pkt6_, values_)); + + // We should have a single value on the stack and it should be "true" + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("true", values_.top()); + + // be tidy + clearStack(); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_RELAY6 Pushing PKT6 relay field linkaddr nest 0 " + "with value 0x00000000000000000000000000000000"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_RELAY6 Pushing PKT6 relay field peeraddr nest 0 " + "with value 0x00000000000000000000000000000000"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_RELAY6 Pushing PKT6 relay field linkaddr nest 1 " + "with value 0x00010000000000000000000000000001"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_RELAY6 Pushing PKT6 relay field peeraddr nest 1 " + "with value 0x00010000000000000000000000000002"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_RELAY6_RANGE Pushing PKT6 relay field linkaddr " + "nest 2 with value 0x"); + + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_RELAY6 Pushing PKT6 relay field linkaddr nest -1 " + "with value 0x00010000000000000000000000000001"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_RELAY6 Pushing PKT6 relay field peeraddr nest -1 " + "with value 0x00010000000000000000000000000002"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_RELAY6 Pushing PKT6 relay field linkaddr nest -2 " + "with value 0x00000000000000000000000000000000"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_RELAY6 Pushing PKT6 relay field peeraddr nest -2 " + "with value 0x00000000000000000000000000000000"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_RELAY6_RANGE Pushing PKT6 relay field linkaddr " + "nest -3 with value 0x"); + + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_RELAY6 Pushing PKT6 relay field linkaddr nest 1 " + "with value 0x00010000000000000000000000000001"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_IPADDRESS Pushing IPAddress " + "0x00010000000000000000000000000001"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_EQUAL Popping 0x00010000000000000000000000000001 " + "and 0x00010000000000000000000000000001 pushing result 'true'"); + + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks some error cases for a relay6 field token +TEST_F(TokenTest, relay6FieldError) { + // Create a valid relay6 field token + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenRelay6Field(0, TokenRelay6Field::LINKADDR))); + + // a DHCPv6 packet is required + ASSERT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + + // No test for unknown field as it is not (yet) checked?! +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an == operator is able to +// compare two values (with incorrectly built stack). +TEST_F(TokenTest, optionEqualInvalid) { + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenEqual())); + + // CASE 1: There's not enough values on the stack. == is an operator that + // takes two parameters. There are 0 on the stack. + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + // CASE 2: One value is still not enough. + values_.push("foo"); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an == operator is able to +// compare two different values. +TEST_F(TokenTest, optionEqualFalse) { + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenEqual())); + + values_.push("foo"); + values_.push("bar"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // After evaluation there should be a single value that represents + // result of "foo" == "bar" comparison. + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("false", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_EQUAL Popping 0x626172 and 0x666F6F " + "pushing result 'false'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an == operator is able to +// compare two identical values. +TEST_F(TokenTest, optionEqualTrue) { + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenEqual())); + + values_.push("foo"); + values_.push("foo"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // After evaluation there should be a single value that represents + // result of "foo" == "foo" comparison. + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("true", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_EQUAL Popping 0x666F6F and 0x666F6F " + "pushing result 'true'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing a substring request +// throws an exception if there aren't enough values on the stack. +// The stack from the top is: length, start, string. +// The actual packet is not used. +TEST_F(TokenTest, substringNotEnoughValues) { + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenSubstring())); + + // Substring requires three values on the stack, try + // with 0, 1 and 2 all should throw an exception + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + values_.push(""); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + values_.push("0"); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + // Three should work + values_.push("0"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // As we had an empty string to start with we should have an empty + // one after the evaluate + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING_EMPTY Popping length 0, start 0, " + "string 0x pushing result 0x"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test getting the whole string in different ways +TEST_F(TokenTest, substringWholeString) { + // Get the whole string + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "0", "6", "foobar"); + + // Get the whole string with "all" + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "0", "all", "foobar"); + + // Get the whole string with an extra long number + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "0", "123456", "foobar"); + + // Get the whole string counting from the back + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "-6", "all", "foobar"); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 6, start 0, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x666F6F626172"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length all, start 0, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x666F6F626172"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 123456, start 0, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x666F6F626172"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length all, start -6, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x666F6F626172"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test getting a suffix, in this case the last 3 characters +TEST_F(TokenTest, substringTrailer) { + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "3", "3", "bar"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "3", "all", "bar"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "-3", "all", "bar"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "-3", "123", "bar"); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 3, start 3, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x626172"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length all, start 3, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x626172"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length all, start -3, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x626172"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 123, start -3, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x626172"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test getting the middle of the string in different ways +TEST_F(TokenTest, substringMiddle) { + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "1", "4", "ooba"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "-5", "4", "ooba"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "-1", "-4", "ooba"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "5", "-4", "ooba"); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 4, start 1, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x6F6F6261"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 4, start -5, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x6F6F6261"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length -4, start -1, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x6F6F6261"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length -4, start 5, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x6F6F6261"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test getting the last letter in different ways +TEST_F(TokenTest, substringLastLetter) { + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "5", "all", "r"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "5", "1", "r"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "5", "5", "r"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "-1", "all", "r"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "-1", "1", "r"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "-1", "5", "r"); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length all, start 5, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x72"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 1, start 5, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x72"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 5, start 5, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x72"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length all, start -1, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x72"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 1, start -1, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x72"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 5, start -1, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x72"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test we get only what is available if we ask for a longer string +TEST_F(TokenTest, substringLength) { + // Test off the front + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "0", "-4", ""); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "1", "-4", "f"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "2", "-4", "fo"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "3", "-4", "foo"); + + // and the back + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "3", "4", "bar"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "4", "4", "ar"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "5", "4", "r"); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "6", "4", ""); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length -4, start 0, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length -4, start 1, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x66"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length -4, start 2, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x666F"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length -4, start 3, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x666F6F"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 4, start 3, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x626172"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 4, start 4, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x6172"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 4, start 5, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x72"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING_RANGE Popping length 4, start 6, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test that we get nothing if the starting position is out of the string +TEST_F(TokenTest, substringStartingPosition) { + // Off the front + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "-7", "1", ""); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "-7", "-11", ""); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "-7", "all", ""); + + // and the back + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "6", "1", ""); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "6", "-11", ""); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "6", "all", ""); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING_RANGE Popping length 1, start -7, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING_RANGE Popping length -11, start -7, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING_RANGE Popping length all, start -7, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING_RANGE Popping length 1, start 6, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING_RANGE Popping length -11, start 6, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING_RANGE Popping length all, start 6, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Check what happens if we use strings that aren't numbers for start or length +// We should return the empty string +TEST_F(TokenTest, substringBadParams) { + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "0ick", "all", "", true); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "ick0", "all", "", true); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "ick", "all", "", true); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "0", "ick", "", true); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "0", "0ick", "", true); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "0", "ick0", "", true); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "0", "allaboard", "", true); + + // These should result in a throw which should generate it's own + // log entry +} + +// lastly check that we don't get anything if the string is empty or +// we don't ask for any characters from it. +TEST_F(TokenTest, substringReturnEmpty) { + verifySubstringEval("", "0", "all", ""); + verifySubstringEval("foobar", "0", "0", ""); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING_EMPTY Popping length all, start 0, " + "string 0x pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 0, start 0, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Check if we can use the substring and equal tokens together +// We put the result on the stack first then the substring values +// then evaluate the substring which should leave the original +// result on the bottom with the substring result on next. +// Evaluating the equals should produce true for the first +// and false for the second. +// throws an exception if there aren't enough values on the stack. +// The stack from the top is: length, start, string. +// The actual packet is not used. +TEST_F(TokenTest, substringEquals) { + TokenPtr tequal; + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenSubstring())); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(tequal.reset(new TokenEqual())); + + // The final expected value + values_.push("ooba"); + + // The substring values + values_.push("foobar"); + values_.push("1"); + values_.push("4"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // we should have two values on the stack + ASSERT_EQ(2, values_.size()); + + // next the equals eval + EXPECT_NO_THROW(tequal->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("true", values_.top()); + + // get rid of the result + values_.pop(); + + // and try it again but with a bad final value + // The final expected value + values_.push("foob"); + + // The substring values + values_.push("foobar"); + values_.push("1"); + values_.push("4"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // we should have two values on the stack + ASSERT_EQ(2, values_.size()); + + // next the equals eval + EXPECT_NO_THROW(tequal->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("false", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 4, start 1, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x6F6F6261"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_EQUAL Popping 0x6F6F6261 and 0x6F6F6261 " + "pushing result 'true'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUBSTRING Popping length 4, start 1, " + "string 0x666F6F626172 pushing result 0x6F6F6261"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_EQUAL Popping 0x6F6F6261 and 0x666F6F62 " + "pushing result 'false'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing a concat request +// throws an exception if there aren't enough values on the stack. +// The actual packet is not used. +TEST_F(TokenTest, concat) { + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenConcat())); + + // Concat requires two values on the stack, try + // with 0 and 1 both should throw an exception + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + values_.push("foo"); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + // Two should work + values_.push("bar"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check the result + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("foobar", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_CONCAT Popping 0x626172 and 0x666F6F " + "pushing 0x666F6F626172"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing a hexstring request +// throws an exception if there aren't enough values on the stack. +// The actual packet is not used. +TEST_F(TokenTest, tohexstring) { + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenToHexString())); + + // Hexstring requires two values on the stack, try + // with 0 and 1 both should throw an exception + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + values_.push("foo"); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + // Two should work + values_.push("-"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Check the result + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("66-6f-6f", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_TOHEXSTRING Popping binary value 0x666F6F and " + "separator -, pushing result 66-6f-6f"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an ifelse is able +// to select the branch following the condition. +TEST_F(TokenTest, ifElse) { + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenIfElse())); + + // Ifelse requires three values on the stack, try + // with 0, 1 and 2 all should throw an exception + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + values_.push("bar"); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + values_.push("foo"); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + // The condition must be a boolean + values_.push("bar"); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + + // Check if what it returns + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenIfElse())); + values_.push("true"); + values_.push("foo"); + values_.push("bar"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("foo", values_.top()); + + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenIfElse())); + values_.push("false"); + values_.push("foo"); + values_.push("bar"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("bar", values_.top()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing a not is able to +// negate a boolean value (with incorrectly built stack). +TEST_F(TokenTest, operatorNotInvalid) { + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenNot())); + + // CASE 1: The stack is empty. + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + // CASE 2: The top value is not a boolean + values_.push("foo"); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing a not operator is able to +// negate a boolean value. +TEST_F(TokenTest, operatorNot) { + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenNot())); + + values_.push("true"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // After evaluation there should be the negation of the value. + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("false", values_.top()); + + // Double negation is identity. + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("true", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_NOT Popping 'true' pushing 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_NOT Popping 'false' pushing 'true'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an and is able to +// conjugate two values (with incorrectly built stack). +TEST_F(TokenTest, operatorAndInvalid) { + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenAnd())); + + // CASE 1: There's not enough values on the stack. and is an operator that + // takes two parameters. There are 0 on the stack. + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + // CASE 2: One value is still not enough. + values_.push("foo"); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + // CASE 3: The two values must be logical + values_.push("true"); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + + // Swap the 2 values + values_.push("true"); + values_.push("foo"); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an and operator is able to +// conjugate false with another logical +TEST_F(TokenTest, operatorAndFalse) { + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenAnd())); + + values_.push("true"); + values_.push("false"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // After evaluation there should be a single "false" value + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("false", values_.top()); + + // After true and false, check false and true + values_.push("true"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("false", values_.top()); + + // And false and false + values_.push("false"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("false", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_AND Popping 'false' and 'true' pushing 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_AND Popping 'true' and 'false' pushing 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_AND Popping 'false' and 'false' pushing 'false'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an and is able to +// conjugate two true values. +TEST_F(TokenTest, operatorAndTrue) { + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenAnd())); + + values_.push("true"); + values_.push("true"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // After evaluation there should be a single "true" value + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("true", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_AND Popping 'true' and 'true' pushing 'true'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an or is able to +// combine two values (with incorrectly built stack). +TEST_F(TokenTest, operatorOrInvalid) { + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenOr())); + + // CASE 1: There's not enough values on the stack. or is an operator that + // takes two parameters. There are 0 on the stack. + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + // CASE 2: One value is still not enough. + values_.push("foo"); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalBadStack); + + // CASE 3: The two values must be logical + values_.push("true"); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); + + // Swap the 2 values + values_.push("true"); + values_.push("foo"); + EXPECT_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_), EvalTypeError); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an or is able to +// conjugate two false values. +TEST_F(TokenTest, operatorOrFalse) { + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenOr())); + + values_.push("false"); + values_.push("false"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // After evaluation there should be a single "false" value + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("false", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OR Popping 'false' and 'false' pushing 'false'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks if a token representing an == operator is able to +// conjugate true with another logical +TEST_F(TokenTest, operatorOrTrue) { + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenOr())); + + values_.push("false"); + values_.push("true"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // After evaluation there should be a single "true" value + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("true", values_.top()); + + // After false or true, checks true or false + values_.push("false"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("true", values_.top()); + + // And true or true + values_.push("true"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("true", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OR Popping 'true' and 'false' pushing 'true'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OR Popping 'false' and 'true' pushing 'true'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OR Popping 'true' and 'true' pushing 'true'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test verifies client class membership +TEST_F(TokenTest, member) { + + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenMember("foo"))); + + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // the packet has no classes so false was left on the stack + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("false", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Add bar and retry + pkt4_->addClass("bar"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // the packet has a class but it is not foo + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("false", values_.top()); + values_.pop(); + + // Add foo and retry + pkt4_->addClass("foo"); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // Now the packet is in the foo class + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("true", values_.top()); +} + +// This test verifies if expression vendor[4491].exists works properly in DHCPv4. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendor4SpecificVendorExists) { + // Case 1: no option, should evaluate to false + testVendorExists(Option::V4, 4491, 0, "false"); + + // Case 2: option present, but uses different enterprise-id, should fail + testVendorExists(Option::V4, 4491, 1234, "false"); + + // Case 3: option present and has matching enterprise-id, should succeed + testVendorExists(Option::V4, 4491, 4491, "true"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_NO_OPTION Option with code 125 missing, " + "pushing result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for 4491, " + "option had 1234, pushing result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_EXISTS Option with enterprise-id 4491 " + "found, pushing result 'true'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test verifies if expression vendor[4491].exists works properly in DHCPv6. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendor6SpecificVendorExists) { + // Case 1: no option, should evaluate to false + testVendorExists(Option::V6, 4491, 0, "false"); + + // Case 2: option present, but uses different enterprise-id, should fail + testVendorExists(Option::V6, 4491, 1234, "false"); + + // Case 3: option present and has matching enterprise-id, should succeed + testVendorExists(Option::V6, 4491, 4491, "true"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_NO_OPTION Option with code 17 missing, " + "pushing result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for 4491, " + "option had 1234, pushing result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_EXISTS Option with enterprise-id 4491 " + "found, pushing result 'true'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +/// Test if expression vendor[*].exists works properly for DHCPv4. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendor4AnyVendorExists) { + // Case 1: no option, should evaluate to false + testVendorExists(Option::V4, 0, 0, "false"); + + // Case 2: option present with vendor-id 1234, should succeed + testVendorExists(Option::V4, 0, 1234, "true"); + + // Case 3: option present with vendor-id 4491, should succeed + testVendorExists(Option::V4, 0, 4491, "true"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_NO_OPTION Option with code 125 missing, " + "pushing result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_EXISTS Option with enterprise-id 1234 " + "found, pushing result 'true'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_EXISTS Option with enterprise-id 4491 " + "found, pushing result 'true'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test if expression vendor[*].exists works properly for DHCPv6. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendor6AnyVendorExists) { + // Case 1: no option, should evaluate to false + testVendorExists(Option::V6, 0, 0, "false"); + + // Case 2: option present with vendor-id 1234, should succeed + testVendorExists(Option::V6, 0, 1234, "true"); + + // Case 3: option present with vendor-id 4491, should succeed + testVendorExists(Option::V6, 0, 4491, "true"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_NO_OPTION Option with code 17 missing, " + "pushing result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_EXISTS Option with enterprise-id 1234 " + "found, pushing result 'true'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_EXISTS Option with enterprise-id 4491 " + "found, pushing result 'true'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test if expression vendor[*].enterprise works properly for DHCPv4. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendor4enterprise) { + // Case 1: No option present, should return empty string + testVendorEnterprise(Option::V4, 0, ""); + + // Case 2: Option with vendor-id 1234, should return "1234" + testVendorEnterprise(Option::V4, 1234, encode(1234)); + + // Case 3: Option with vendor-id set to maximum value, should still + // be able to handle it + testVendorEnterprise(Option::V4, 4294967295, encode(4294967295)); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_NO_OPTION Option with code 125 missing, pushing" + " result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_ENTERPRISE_ID Pushing enterprise-id 1234 as " + "result 0x000004D2"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_ENTERPRISE_ID Pushing enterprise-id 4294967295" + " as result 0xFFFFFFFF"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test if expression vendor[*].enterprise works properly for DHCPv6. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendor6enterprise) { + // Case 1: No option present, should return empty string + testVendorEnterprise(Option::V6, 0, ""); + + // Case 2: Option with vendor-id 1234, should return "1234" + testVendorEnterprise(Option::V6, 1234, encode(1234)); + + // Case 3: Option with vendor-id set to maximum value, should still + // be able to handle it + testVendorEnterprise(Option::V6, 4294967295, encode(4294967295)); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_NO_OPTION Option with code 17 missing, pushing" + " result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_ENTERPRISE_ID Pushing enterprise-id 1234 as " + "result 0x000004D2"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_ENTERPRISE_ID Pushing enterprise-id 4294967295 " + "as result 0xFFFFFFFF"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This one tests "vendor[4491].option[1].exists" expression. There are so many +// wonderful ways in which this could fail: the option could not be there, +// it could have different enterprise-id, may not have suboption 1. Or may +// have the suboption with valid type, but enterprise may be different. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendor4SuboptionExists) { + // Case 1: expression vendor[4491].option[1].exists, no option present + testVendorSuboption(Option::V4, 4491, 1, 0, 0, TokenOption::EXISTS, "false"); + + // Case 2: expression vendor[4491].option[1].exists, option with vendor-id = 1234, + // no suboptions, expected result "false" + testVendorSuboption(Option::V4, 4491, 1, 1234, 0, TokenOption::EXISTS, "false"); + + // Case 3: expression vendor[4491].option[1].exists, option with vendor-id = 1234, + // suboption 1, expected result "false" + testVendorSuboption(Option::V4, 4491, 1, 1234, 1, TokenOption::EXISTS, "false"); + + // Case 4: expression vendor[4491].option[1].exists, option with vendor-id = 4491, + // suboption 2, expected result "false" + testVendorSuboption(Option::V4, 4491, 1, 4491, 2, TokenOption::EXISTS, "false"); + + // Case 5: expression vendor[4491].option[1].exists, option with vendor-id = 4491, + // suboption 1, expected result "true" + testVendorSuboption(Option::V4, 4491, 1, 4491, 1, TokenOption::EXISTS, "true"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_NO_OPTION Option with code 125 missing, pushing " + "result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for 4491, " + "option had 1234, pushing result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for 4491, " + "option had 1234, pushing result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 1 with value 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 1 with value 'true'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This is similar to the previous one, but tests vendor[4491].option[1].exists +// for DHCPv6. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendor6SuboptionExists) { + // Case 1: expression vendor[4491].option[1].exists, no option present + testVendorSuboption(Option::V6, 4491, 1, 0, 0, TokenOption::EXISTS, "false"); + + // Case 2: expression vendor[4491].option[1].exists, option with vendor-id = 1234, + // no suboptions, expected result "false" + testVendorSuboption(Option::V6, 4491, 1, 1234, 0, TokenOption::EXISTS, "false"); + + // Case 3: expression vendor[4491].option[1].exists, option with vendor-id = 1234, + // suboption 1, expected result "false" + testVendorSuboption(Option::V6, 4491, 1, 1234, 1, TokenOption::EXISTS, "false"); + + // Case 4: expression vendor[4491].option[1].exists, option with vendor-id = 4491, + // suboption 2, expected result "false" + testVendorSuboption(Option::V6, 4491, 1, 4491, 2, TokenOption::EXISTS, "false"); + + // Case 5: expression vendor[4491].option[1].exists, option with vendor-id = 4491, + // suboption 1, expected result "true" + testVendorSuboption(Option::V6, 4491, 1, 4491, 1, TokenOption::EXISTS, "true"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_NO_OPTION Option with code 17 missing, pushing " + "result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for 4491, " + "option had 1234, pushing result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for 4491, " + "option had 1234, pushing result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 1 with value 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 1 with value 'true'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test verifies if vendor[4491].option[1].hex expression properly returns +// value of said sub-option or empty string if desired option is not present. +// This test is for DHCPv4. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendor4SuboptionHex) { + // Case 1: no option present, should return empty string + testVendorSuboption(Option::V4, 4491, 1, 0, 0, TokenOption::HEXADECIMAL, ""); + + // Case 2: option with vendor-id = 1234, no suboptions, expected result "" + testVendorSuboption(Option::V4, 4491, 1, 1234, 0, TokenOption::HEXADECIMAL, ""); + + // Case 3: option with vendor-id = 1234, suboption 1, expected result "" + testVendorSuboption(Option::V4, 4491, 1, 1234, 1, TokenOption::HEXADECIMAL, ""); + + // Case 4: option with vendor-id = 4491, suboption 2, expected result "" + testVendorSuboption(Option::V4, 4491, 1, 4491, 2, TokenOption::HEXADECIMAL, ""); + + // Case 5: option with vendor-id = 4491, suboption 1, expected result content + // of the option + testVendorSuboption(Option::V4, 4491, 1, 4491, 1, TokenOption::HEXADECIMAL, "alpha"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_NO_OPTION Option with code 125 missing, pushing " + "result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for 4491, " + "option had 1234, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for 4491, " + "option had 1234, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 1 with value 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 1 with value 0x616C706861"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test verifies if vendor[4491].option[1].hex expression properly returns +// value of said sub-option or empty string if desired option is not present. +// This test is for DHCPv4. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendor6SuboptionHex) { + // Case 1: no option present, should return empty string + testVendorSuboption(Option::V6, 4491, 1, 0, 0, TokenOption::HEXADECIMAL, ""); + + // Case 2: option with vendor-id = 1234, no suboptions, expected result "" + testVendorSuboption(Option::V6, 4491, 1, 1234, 0, TokenOption::HEXADECIMAL, ""); + + // Case 3: option with vendor-id = 1234, suboption 1, expected result "" + testVendorSuboption(Option::V6, 4491, 1, 1234, 1, TokenOption::HEXADECIMAL, ""); + + // Case 4: option with vendor-id = 4491, suboption 2, expected result "" + testVendorSuboption(Option::V6, 4491, 1, 4491, 2, TokenOption::HEXADECIMAL, ""); + + // Case 5: option with vendor-id = 4491, suboption 1, expected result content + // of the option + testVendorSuboption(Option::V6, 4491, 1, 4491, 1, TokenOption::HEXADECIMAL, "alpha"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_NO_OPTION Option with code 17 missing, pushing " + "result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for 4491, " + "option had 1234, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for 4491, " + "option had 1234, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 1 with value 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_OPTION Pushing option 1 with value 0x616C706861"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test verifies that "vendor-class[4491].exists" expression can be used +// in DHCPv4. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendorClass4SpecificVendorExists) { + // Case 1: no option present, should fail + testVendorClassExists(Option::V4, 4491, 0, "false"); + + // Case 2: option exists, but has different vendor-id (1234), should fail + testVendorClassExists(Option::V4, 4491, 1234, "false"); + + // Case 3: option exists and has matching vendor-id, should succeed + testVendorClassExists(Option::V4, 4491, 4491, "true"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_NO_OPTION Option with code 124 missing, " + "pushing result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for " + "4491, option had 1234, pushing result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_EXISTS Option with enterprise-id 4491 " + "found, pushing result 'true'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test verifies that "vendor-class[4491].exists" expression can be used +// in DHCPv6. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendorClass6SpecificVendorExists) { + // Case 1: no option present, should fail + testVendorClassExists(Option::V6, 4491, 0, "false"); + + // Case 2: option exists, but has different vendor-id (1234), should fail + testVendorClassExists(Option::V6, 4491, 1234, "false"); + + // Case 3: option exists and has matching vendor-id, should succeed + testVendorClassExists(Option::V6, 4491, 4491, "true"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_NO_OPTION Option with code 16 missing, pushing " + "result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for " + "4491, option had 1234, pushing result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_EXISTS Option with enterprise-id 4491 " + "found, pushing result 'true'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test verifies that "vendor-class[*].exists" can be used in DHCPv4 +// and it matches a vendor class option with any vendor-id. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendorClass4AnyVendorExists) { + // Case 1: no option present, should fail + testVendorClassExists(Option::V4, 0, 0, "false"); + + // Case 2: option exists, should succeed, regardless of the vendor-id + testVendorClassExists(Option::V4, 0, 1234, "true"); + + // Case 3: option exists, should succeed, regardless of the vendor-id + testVendorClassExists(Option::V4, 0, 4491, "true"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_NO_OPTION Option with code 124 missing, " + "pushing result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_EXISTS Option with enterprise-id 1234 " + "found, pushing result 'true'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_EXISTS Option with enterprise-id 4491 " + "found, pushing result 'true'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test verifies that "vendor-class[*].exists" can be used in DHCPv6 +// and it matches a vendor class option with any vendor-id. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendorClass6AnyVendorExists) { + // Case 1: no option present, should fail + testVendorClassExists(Option::V6, 0, 0, "false"); + + // Case 2: option exists, should succeed, regardless of the vendor-id + testVendorClassExists(Option::V6, 0, 1234, "true"); + + // Case 3: option exists, should succeed, regardless of the vendor-id + testVendorClassExists(Option::V6, 0, 4491, "true"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_NO_OPTION Option with code 16 missing, pushing " + "result 'false'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_EXISTS Option with enterprise-id 1234 " + "found, pushing result 'true'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_EXISTS Option with enterprise-id 4491 " + "found, pushing result 'true'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test if expression "vendor-class.enterprise" works properly for DHCPv4. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendorClass4enterprise) { + // Case 1: No option present, should return empty string + testVendorClassEnterprise(Option::V4, 0, ""); + + // Case 2: Option with vendor-id 1234, should return "1234" + testVendorClassEnterprise(Option::V4, 1234, encode(1234)); + + // Case 3: Option with vendor-id set to maximum value, should still + // be able to handle it + testVendorClassEnterprise(Option::V4, 4294967295, encode(4294967295)); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_NO_OPTION Option with code 124 missing, pushing " + "result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID Pushing enterprise-id " + "1234 as result 0x000004D2"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID Pushing enterprise-id " + "4294967295 as result 0xFFFFFFFF"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test if expression "vendor-class.enterprise" works properly for DHCPv6. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendorClass6enterprise) { + // Case 1: No option present, should return empty string + testVendorClassEnterprise(Option::V6, 0, ""); + + // Case 2: Option with vendor-id 1234, should return "1234" + testVendorClassEnterprise(Option::V6, 1234, encode(1234)); + + // Case 3: Option with vendor-id set to maximum value, should still + // be able to handle it. + testVendorClassEnterprise(Option::V6, 4294967295, encode(4294967295)); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_NO_OPTION Option with code 16 missing, pushing " + "result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID Pushing enterprise-id " + "1234 as result 0x000004D2"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID Pushing enterprise-id " + "4294967295 as result 0xFFFFFFFF"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test that expression "vendor-class[4491].data" is able to retrieve content +// of the first tuple of the vendor-class option in DHCPv4. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendorClass4SpecificVendorData) { + // Case 1: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[0], there is no + // vendor-class option at all, expected result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 4491, 0, 0, 0, ""); + + // Case 2: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 1234 and no data, expected result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 4491, 0, 1234, 0, ""); + + // Case 3: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 4491 and no data, expected result is empty string. + // Note that vendor option in v4 always have at least one data chunk, even though + // it may be empty. The OptionVendor code was told to not create any special + // tuples, but it creates one empty on its own. So the code finds that one + // tuple and extracts its content (an empty string). + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 4491, 0, 4491, 0, ""); + + // Case 4: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 1234 and 1 data tuple, expected result is empty string + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 4491, 0, 1234, 1, ""); + + // Case 5: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 4491 and 1 data tuple, expected result is + // content of that data ("alpha") + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 4491, 0, 4491, 1, "alpha"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_NO_OPTION Option with code 124 missing, " + "pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for " + "4491, option had 1234, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA Data 0 (out of 1 received) in vendor " + "class found, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for " + "4491, option had 1234, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA Data 0 (out of 1 received) in vendor " + "class found, pushing result 'alpha'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test that expression "vendor-class[4491].data" is able to retrieve content +// of the first tuple of the vendor-class option in DHCPv6. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendorClass6SpecificVendorData) { + // Case 1: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[0], there is no + // vendor-class option at all, expected result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 4491, 0, 0, 0, ""); + + // Case 2: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 1234 and no data, expected result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 4491, 0, 1234, 0, ""); + + // Case 3: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 4491 and no data, expected result is empty string + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 4491, 0, 4491, 0, ""); + + // Case 4: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 1234 and 1 data tuple, expected result is empty string + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 4491, 0, 1234, 1, ""); + + // Case 5: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 4491 and 1 data tuple, expected result is + // content of that data ("alpha") + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 4491, 0, 4491, 1, "alpha"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_NO_OPTION Option with code 16 missing, " + "pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for " + "4491, option had 1234, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA_NOT_FOUND Requested data index 0, " + "but option with enterprise-id 4491 has only 0 data tuple(s), " + "pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for " + "4491, option had 1234, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA Data 0 (out of 1 received) in vendor " + "class found, pushing result 'alpha'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test that expression "vendor-class[*].data" is able to retrieve content +// of the first tuple of the vendor-class option in DHCPv4. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendorClass4AnyVendorData) { + // Case 1: Expression looks for any vendor-id (0), data[0], there is no + // vendor-class option at all, expected result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 0, 0, 0, 0, ""); + + // Case 2: Expression looks for any vendor-id (0), data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 1234 and no data (one empty tuple), expected + // result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 0, 0, 1234, 0, ""); + + // Case 3: Expression looks for any vendor-id (0), data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 4491 and no data (one empty tuple), expected + // result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 0, 0, 4491, 0, ""); + + // Case 4: Expression looks for any vendor-id (0), data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 1234 and 1 data tuple, expected result is + // content of that data ("alpha") + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 0, 0, 1234, 1, "alpha"); + + // Case 5: Expression looks for any vendor-id (0), data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 4491 and 1 data tuple, expected result is + // content of that data ("alpha") + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 0, 0, 4491, 1, "alpha"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_NO_OPTION Option with code 124 missing, " + "pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA Data 0 (out of 1 received) in " + "vendor class found, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA Data 0 (out of 1 received) in " + "vendor class found, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA Data 0 (out of 1 received) in " + "vendor class found, pushing result 'alpha'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA Data 0 (out of 1 received) in " + "vendor class found, pushing result 'alpha'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Test that expression "vendor-class[*].data" is able to retrieve content +// of the first tuple of the vendor-class option in DHCPv6. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendorClass6AnyVendorData) { + // Case 1: Expression looks for any vendor-id (0), data[0], there is no + // vendor-class option at all, expected result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 0, 0, 0, 0, ""); + + // Case 2: Expression looks for any vendor-id (0), data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 1234 and no data, expected result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 0, 0, 1234, 0, ""); + + // Case 3: Expression looks for any vendor-id (0), data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 4491 and no data, expected result is empty string + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 0, 0, 4491, 0, ""); + + // Case 4: Expression looks for any vendor-id (0), data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 1234 and 1 data tuple, expected result is + // content of that data ("alpha") + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 0, 0, 1234, 1, "alpha"); + + // Case 5: Expression looks for any vendor-id (0), data[0], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 4491 and 1 data tuple, expected result is + // content of that data ("alpha") + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 0, 0, 4491, 1, "alpha"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_NO_OPTION Option with code 16 missing, " + "pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA_NOT_FOUND Requested data index 0, " + "but option with enterprise-id 1234 has only 0 data tuple(s), " + "pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA_NOT_FOUND Requested data index 0, " + "but option with enterprise-id 4491 has only 0 data tuple(s), " + "pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA Data 0 (out of 1 received) in vendor " + "class found, pushing result 'alpha'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA Data 0 (out of 1 received) in vendor " + "class found, pushing result 'alpha'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test verifies if expression vendor-class[4491].data[3] is able to access +// the tuple specified by index. This is a DHCPv4 test. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendorClass4DataIndex) { + // Case 1: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[3], there is no + // vendor-class option at all, expected result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 4491, 3, 0, 0, ""); + + // Case 2: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[3], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 1234 and no data, expected result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 4491, 3, 1234, 0, ""); + + // Case 3: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[3], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 4491 and no data, expected result is empty string + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 4491, 3, 4491, 0, ""); + + // Case 4: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[3], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 1234 and 1 data tuple, expected result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 4491, 3, 1234, 1, ""); + + // Case 5: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[3], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 4491, but has only 3 data tuples, expected + // result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 4491, 3, 4491, 3, ""); + + // Case 6: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[3], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 4491 and 5 data tuples, expected result is + // content of that tuple ("gamma") + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 4491, 3, 4491, 5, "gamma"); + + // Case 6: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[3], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 1234 and 5 data tuples, expected result is + // empty string, because vendor-id does not match. + testVendorClassData(Option::V4, 4491, 3, 1234, 5, ""); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_NO_OPTION Option with code 124 missing, " + "pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for " + "4491, option had 1234, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA_NOT_FOUND Requested data index 3, " + "but option with enterprise-id 4491 has only 1 data tuple(s), " + "pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for " + "4491, option had 1234, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA_NOT_FOUND Requested data index 3, " + "but option with enterprise-id 4491 has only 3 data tuple(s), " + "pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA Data 3 (out of 5 received) in vendor " + "class found, pushing result 'gamma'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for " + "4491, option had 1234, pushing result ''"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test verifies if expression vendor-class[4491].data[3] is able to access +// the tuple specified by index. This is a DHCPv6 test. +TEST_F(TokenTest, vendorClass6DataIndex) { + // Case 1: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[3], there is no + // vendor-class option at all, expected result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 4491, 3, 0, 0, ""); + + // Case 2: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[3], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 1234 and no data, expected result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 4491, 3, 1234, 0, ""); + + // Case 3: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[3], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 4491 and no data, expected result is empty string + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 4491, 3, 4491, 0, ""); + + // Case 4: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[3], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 1234 and 5 data tuples, expected result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 4491, 3, 1234, 5, ""); + + // Case 5: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[3], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 4491, but has only 3 data tuples, expected + // result is empty string. + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 4491, 3, 4491, 3, ""); + + // Case 6: Expression looks for vendor-id 4491, data[3], there is + // vendor-class with vendor-id 4491 and 5 data tuples, expected result is + // content of that tuple ("gamma") + testVendorClassData(Option::V6, 4491, 3, 4491, 5, "gamma"); + + // Check if the logged messages are correct. + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_NO_OPTION Option with code 16 missing, " + "pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for " + "4491, option had 1234, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA_NOT_FOUND Requested data index 3, " + "but option with enterprise-id 4491 has only 0 data tuple(s), " + "pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_ENTERPRISE_ID_MISMATCH Was looking for " + "4491, option had 1234, pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA_NOT_FOUND Requested data index 3, " + "but option with enterprise-id 4491 has only 3 data tuple(s), " + "pushing result ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_VENDOR_CLASS_DATA Data 3 (out of 5 received) in vendor" + " class found, pushing result 'gamma'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks that the existing RAI -sunoption can be found. +TEST_F(TokenTest, subOption) { + + // Insert relay option with sub-options 1 and 13 + insertRelay4Option(); + + // Creating the token should be safe. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenSubOption(DHO_DHCP_AGENT_OPTIONS, + 13, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + + // We should be able to evaluate it. + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // we should have one value on the stack + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + + // The option should be found and option[82].option[13] should evaluate + // to thecontent of that sub-option, i.e. "thirteen" + EXPECT_EQ("thirteen", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUB_OPTION Pushing option 82 " + "sub-option 13 with value 'thirteen'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks that the code properly handles cases when +// there is a RAI option, but there's no requested sub-option. +TEST_F(TokenTest, subOptionNoSubOption) { + + // Insert relay option with sub-options 1 and 13 + insertRelay4Option(); + + + // Creating the token should be safe. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenSubOption(DHO_DHCP_AGENT_OPTIONS, + 15, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + + // We should be able to evaluate it. + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // we should have one value on the stack + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + + // The option should NOT be found (there is no sub-option 15), + // so the expression should evaluate to "" + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUB_OPTION Pushing option 82 " + "sub-option 15 with value ''"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks that the code properly handles cases when +// there's no RAI option at all. +TEST_F(TokenTest, subOptionNoOption) { + + // We didn't call insertRelay4Option(), so there's no RAI option. + + // Creating the token should be safe. + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenSubOption(DHO_DHCP_AGENT_OPTIONS, + 13, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + + // We should be able to evaluate it. + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + + // we should have one value on the stack + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + + // The option should NOT be found (there is no option 82), + // so the expression should evaluate to "" + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUB_OPTION_NO_OPTION Requested option 82 " + "sub-option 13, but the parent option is not present, " + "pushing result ''"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// This test checks that only the requested parent is searched for +// the requested sub-option. +TEST_F(TokenTest, subOptionOptionOnly) { + + // Insert relay option with sub-options 1 and 13 + insertRelay4Option(); + + // Add options 13 and 70 to the packet. + OptionPtr opt13(new OptionString(Option::V4, 13, "THIRTEEN")); + OptionPtr opt70(new OptionString(Option::V4, 70, "SEVENTY")); + pkt4_->addOption(opt13); + pkt4_->addOption(opt70); + + // The situation is as follows: + // Packet: + // - option 13 (containing "THIRTEEN") + // - option 82 (rai) + // - option 1 (containing "one") + // - option 13 (containing "thirteen") + + // Let's try to get option 13. It should get the one from RAI + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenSubOption(DHO_DHCP_AGENT_OPTIONS, + 13, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("thirteen", values_.top()); + + // Try to get option 1. It should get the one from RAI + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenSubOption(DHO_DHCP_AGENT_OPTIONS, + 1, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("one", values_.top()); + + // Try to get option 70. It should fail, as there's no such + // sub option in RAI. + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenSubOption(DHO_DHCP_AGENT_OPTIONS, + 70, TokenOption::TEXTUAL))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("", values_.top()); + + // Try to check option 1. It should return "true" + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenSubOption(DHO_DHCP_AGENT_OPTIONS, + 1, TokenOption::EXISTS))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("true", values_.top()); + + // Try to check option 70. It should return "false" + clearStack(); + ASSERT_NO_THROW(t_.reset(new TokenSubOption(DHO_DHCP_AGENT_OPTIONS, + 70, TokenOption::EXISTS))); + EXPECT_NO_THROW(t_->evaluate(*pkt4_, values_)); + ASSERT_EQ(1, values_.size()); + EXPECT_EQ("false", values_.top()); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUB_OPTION Pushing option 82 " + "sub-option 13 with value 'thirteen'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUB_OPTION Pushing option 82 " + "sub-option 1 with value 'one'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUB_OPTION Pushing option 82 " + "sub-option 70 with value ''"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUB_OPTION Pushing option 82 " + "sub-option 1 with value 'true'"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SUB_OPTION Pushing option 82 " + "sub-option 70 with value 'false'"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Checks if various values can be represented as integer tokens +TEST_F(TokenTest, integer) { + testInteger(encode(0), 0); + testInteger(encode(6), 6); + testInteger(encode(255), 255); + testInteger(encode(256), 256); + testInteger(encode(1410), 1410); + testInteger(encode(4294967295), 4294967295); +} + +// Verify TokenSplit::eval, single delimiter. +TEST_F(TokenTest, split) { + // Get the whole string + std::string input(".two.three..five."); + std::string delims("."); + + // Empty input string should yield empty result. + verifySplitEval("", delims, "1", ""); + + // Empty delimiters string should yield original string result. + verifySplitEval(input, "", "1", input); + + // Field number less than one should yield empty result. + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "0", ""); + + // Now get each field in succession. + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "1", ""); + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "2", "two"); + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "3", "three"); + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "4", ""); + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "5", "five"); + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "6", ""); + + // Too large of a field should yield empty result. + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "7", ""); + + // A string without delimiters returns as field 1. + verifySplitEval("just_one", delims, "1", "just_one"); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT_EMPTY Popping field 1, delimiters .," + " string , pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT_DELIM_EMPTY Popping field 1, delimiters ," + " string .two.three..five., pushing result 0x2E74776F2E74687265652E2E666976652E"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT_FIELD_OUT_OF_RANGE Popping field 0, delimiters .," + " string .two.three..five., pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT Popping field 1, delimiters .," + " string .two.three..five., pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT Popping field 2, delimiters .," + " string .two.three..five., pushing result 0x74776F"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT Popping field 3, delimiters .," + " string .two.three..five., pushing result 0x7468726565"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT Popping field 4, delimiters .," + " string .two.three..five., pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT Popping field 5, delimiters .," + " string .two.three..five., pushing result 0x66697665"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT Popping field 6, delimiters .," + " string .two.three..five., pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT_FIELD_OUT_OF_RANGE Popping field 7, delimiters .," + " string .two.three..five., pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT Popping field 1, delimiters .," + " string just_one, pushing result 0x6A7573745F6F6E65"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +// Verify TokenSplit::eval with more than one delimiter. +TEST_F(TokenTest, splitMultipleDelims) { + // Get the whole string + std::string input(".two:three.:five."); + std::string delims(".:"); + + // Empty input string should yield empty result. + verifySplitEval("", delims, "1", ""); + + // Too small of a field should yield empty result. + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "0", ""); + + // Now get each field in succession. + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "1", ""); + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "2", "two"); + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "3", "three"); + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "4", ""); + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "5", "five"); + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "6", ""); + + // Too large of a field should yield empty result. + verifySplitEval(input, delims, "7", ""); + + // A string without delimiters returns as field 1. + verifySplitEval("just_one", delims, "1", "just_one"); + + // Check that the debug output was correct. Add the strings + // to the test vector in the class and then call checkFile + // for comparison + + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT_EMPTY Popping field 1, delimiters .:," + " string , pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT_FIELD_OUT_OF_RANGE Popping field 0, delimiters .:," + " string .two:three.:five., pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT Popping field 1, delimiters .:," + " string .two:three.:five., pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT Popping field 2, delimiters .:," + " string .two:three.:five., pushing result 0x74776F"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT Popping field 3, delimiters .:," + " string .two:three.:five., pushing result 0x7468726565"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT Popping field 4, delimiters .:," + " string .two:three.:five., pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT Popping field 5, delimiters .:," + " string .two:three.:five., pushing result 0x66697665"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT Popping field 6, delimiters .:," + " string .two:three.:five., pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT_FIELD_OUT_OF_RANGE Popping field 7, delimiters .:," + " string .two:three.:five., pushing result 0x"); + addString("EVAL_DEBUG_SPLIT Popping field 1, delimiters .:," + " string just_one, pushing result 0x6A7573745F6F6E65"); + EXPECT_TRUE(checkFile()); +} + +}; |