Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 11:43:16 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Mike Bristow <mike@urgle.com> Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Sergey Vinogradov <boogie@lazybytes.org> Subject: Re: ifconfig output: ipv4 netmask format Message-ID: <BD12DE29-B333-4560-8408-E64CFAAD810A@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20110408155520.GA40792@cheddar.urgle.com> References: <4D9EFAC6.4020906@lazybytes.org> <7EA5889E-77EF-4BAE-9655-C33692A75602@bsdimp.com> <4D9F2C88.4010205@lazybytes.org> <20110408155520.GA40792@cheddar.urgle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Apr 8, 2011, at 9:55 AM, Mike Bristow wrote: > On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 07:40:56PM +0400, Sergey Vinogradov wrote: >> On 08.04.2011 19:23, Warner Losh wrote: >>> On Apr 8, 2011, at 6:08 AM, Sergey Vinogradov wrote: >>> If we really wanted to make it human readable, we'd output 10.2.3.4/24 >> >> So, maybe, while following the POLA, we should add an option, as Daniel >> mentioned above? To output the CIDR? > > Non-contigous netmasks are legal in IPv4. What do you do if someone adds > the CIDR flag but the netmask cannot be represented in CIDR notation? They have become illegal in the fullness of time. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BD12DE29-B333-4560-8408-E64CFAAD810A>