treewide: Use "our address" instead of "forwarding address"

The term "forwarding address" to indicate the local-to-passt address was
well-intentioned, but ends up being kinda confusing.  As discussed on a
recent call, let's try "our" instead.

(While we're there correct an error in flow_initiate_af()s comments where
we referred to parameters by the wrong name).

Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/icmp.c b/icmp.c
index cb81c76..f514dbc 100644
--- a/icmp.c
+++ b/icmp.c
@@ -125,13 +125,13 @@ void icmp_sock_handler(const struct ctx *c, union epoll_ref ref)
 		 ini->eport, seq);
 
 	if (pingf->f.type == FLOW_PING4) {
-		const struct in_addr *saddr = inany_v4(&ini->faddr);
+		const struct in_addr *saddr = inany_v4(&ini->oaddr);
 		const struct in_addr *daddr = inany_v4(&ini->eaddr);
 
 		ASSERT(saddr && daddr); /* Must have IPv4 addresses */
 		tap_icmp4_send(c, *saddr, *daddr, buf, n);
 	} else if (pingf->f.type == FLOW_PING6) {
-		const struct in6_addr *saddr = &ini->faddr.a6;
+		const struct in6_addr *saddr = &ini->oaddr.a6;
 		const struct in6_addr *daddr = &ini->eaddr.a6;
 
 		tap_icmp6_send(c, saddr, daddr, buf, n);