Re: ipcalc is peculiar
John <spam-awV0wQp4Vu3DYUAvPcDoSaaDwS/[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.redhat.taroon |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Friday 29 August 2003 22:07, Denis Hennessy wrote: > Putting a '0' in front of a number is a way of forcing it to be > interpreted as octal. 017 is a valid octal number, corresponding to the > decimal value 15. However, 019 is not a valid number since you can't > have '9' in an octal number. That is not documented behaviour for either ipcalc or ifconfig Nor is it consistent with other programs: [spam@debian spam]$ ping -c4 172.019.0.1 ping: unknown host 172.019.0.1 [spam@debian spam]$ host 172.019.0.1 Host 1.0.19.172.in-addr.arpa not found: 2(SERVFAIL) [spam@debian spam]$ telnet 172.019.0.1 172.019.0.1: Unknown host [spam@debian spam]$ I think these programs show preferable results. I thought of how to check ifconfig without breaking something. It's fine, though once there wasn't. > > /dh > > John wrote: > >As I understand it, the four segments of a human'comprehendable IP address > > are decimal number. Not binary, not hexadecimal or octal, decimal. > >[spam@debian spam]$ ipcalc --network 172.19.0.1/8 > >NETWORK=172.0.0.0 > >[spam@debian spam]$ ipcalc --network 172.019.0.1/8 > >ipcalc: bad ip address: 172.019.0.1 > >[spam@debian spam]$ ipcalc --network 172.17.0.1/8 > >NETWORK=172.0.0.0 > >[spam@debian spam]$ ipcalc --network 172.017.0.1/8 > >NETWORK=172.0.0.0 > >[spam@debian spam]$ > > > > > >I believe, but haven't tested recently, that ifconfig also has this > >affliction. > > -- > Taroon-beta-list mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/taroon-beta-list -- My bits for Taroon: http://debian.merseine.nu/taroon/ -- Taroon-beta-list mailing list [email protected] http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/taroon-beta-list