Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alex Pilosov <alex(at)pilosoft(dot)com>
Cc: Larry Rosenman <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR
Date: 2000-10-27 22:58:50
Message-ID: 5583.972687530@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> There is no subset type that corresponds to "valid host addresses
> only" --- if there were, it would be a subset of INET but would have
> no valid values in common with CIDR.

I take that back --- CIDR accepts w.x.y.z/32 for any w.x.y.z, which
would include valid host addresses. (But perhaps it should only
accept netmasks shorter than 32 bits? Not sure if "CIDR" is commonly
understood to be network specs only, or network and host specs.)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2000-10-27 23:08:05 Re: [HACKERS] Re:RPM dependencies (Was: 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?))
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-10-27 22:54:02 Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR