Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 02:08:40 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Sergey Vinogradov <boogie@lazybytes.org> Subject: Re: ifconfig output: ipv4 netmask format Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1104090204240.6104@ai.fobar.qr> In-Reply-To: <8B793E28-0426-46CC-AB10-E0257AF6707D@bsdimp.com> References: <4D9EFAC6.4020906@lazybytes.org> <7EA5889E-77EF-4BAE-9655-C33692A75602@bsdimp.com> <4D9F2C88.4010205@lazybytes.org> <20110408155520.GA40792@cheddar.urgle.com> <4D9F5B31.9000509@lazybytes.org> <8B793E28-0426-46CC-AB10-E0257AF6707D@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 8 Apr 2011, Warner Losh wrote:
> Non-contiguous netmasks are *not* legal anymore in IPv4.
Just reference the RFC and everyone will agree... *oops* ;-)
On the general thread:
I'd seriously stop bothering with any decisions that will change the way
IPv4 works or has worked or the output tools gave people for 20 or more
years unless there is a really good reason. Do not break things just
because you don't like it. It's hardcoded into too many brains^Wscripts.
just my 0.01cts.
PS: I am all for making things more restrictive no longer thinking
inet is the default but even that's hard...
--
Bjoern A. Zeeb You have to have visions!
Stop bit received. Insert coin for new address family.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1104090204240.6104>