Re: Proposal to apply mask to IP address set on rule
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.network |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Vadim Goncharov <[email protected]> wrote: >> express a "subnet" as "addr/mask" and still >> have non-zero host bits >> in the "addr" part. >> >> > Is it? I never use that. >> >> The advantage of doing so is that you no longer risk zeroing the wrong >> number of bits when go from a /128 to the subnet that encloses it. >> v6: pretty non-trivial to get right. > Is it? As v6 has addresses in hex, it's simpler to apply calculations. Sorry, I meant trivial to get right. It's much easier in v6, I agree. >> v4 with non-multiples of 8: saves many mistakes. Number of times I mask with 240 rather than 224 when dealing with /27s vs /26s. (vs /28s)...