Re: inet increment w/ int8

* Bruce Momjian (pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Douglas McNaught wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> >
> > > I modified the TODO. I think we only need an INT4. I realize INT8
> > > would be for IPV6 but I can't imagine a network that has more than INT4
> > > hosts (not part of the network address).
> >
> > Actually "increment the host address" isn't a well-defined concept for
> > IPV6. The "host" part of the address (if you're on an Ethernet) is
> > generally the 64 bit MAC address.
>
> So if the network card dies the machine has a new IPv6 address and you
> just update your DNS? Do you update your routing tables?

Generally routing isn't done to the last 48 bits (dunno where 64 bit
came from, but MAC's are 48 last I checked :).

DNS to that level would need to be changed though, yes.. :/

(I'm not exactly a big fan of this development, in fact, I think it's a
bunch of poo, but then, I don't write the standards).

Stephen