From: | Larry Rosenman <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, greg <greg(dot)wickham(at)grangenet(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: FW: New function - hostmask |
Date: | 2003-03-21 20:51:16 |
Message-ID: | 8680000.1048279876@lerlaptop.iadfw.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Yes, I would.
I use a PostgreSQL backed IP management database (home grown, written by
yours truly), and
with some of the enhancements we are looking at, this would be useful.
LER
--On Friday, March 21, 2003 15:46:02 -0500 Bruce Momjian
<pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Does anyone see value in a hostmask function() --- description below?
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
>
> greg wrote:
>> ] -----Original Message-----
>> ] From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us]
>> ] Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 12:25 PM
>> ] To: greg
>> ] Subject: Re: FW: New function - hostmask
>> ]
>> ]
>> ]
>> ] Oh, OK. We usually need a larger value to add a function to
>> ] the main distribution. Would you see if you can find another
>> ] user who thinks this is valuable?
>> ]
>> ] --------------------------------------------------------------
>> ] -------------
>> ]
>> ] greg wrote:
>> ] > Hi Bruce,
>> ] >
>> ] > I don't think I got your email in response.
>> ] >
>> ] > Yes. I think it has good value. I'm generating cisco network
>> ] > configurations out of a database and in the OSPF
>> ] configuration area a
>> ] > hostmask is used (rather than a netmask) to define a subnet. Ie:
>> ] >
>> ] > router ospf 18062
>> ] > network 202.0.98.51 0.0.0.0 area 0
>> ] > network 202.0.98.52 0.0.0.3 area 0
>> ] >
>> ] > Where as the netmask is used for similar functionality in bgp (and
>> ] > interface configurations):
>> ] >
>> ] > router bgp 18062
>> ] > network 202.0.98.51 mask 255.255.255.255 route-map
>> ] > AS18062-INFRASTRUCTURE-ROUTE
>> ] > network 202.0.98.52 mask 255.255.255.252 route-map
>> ] > AS18062-INFRASTRUCTURE-ROUTE
>> ] >
>> ] > interface Loopback0
>> ] > ip address 202.0.98.49 255.255.255.255
>> ] >
>> ] > It's an annoying cisco'ism. There are ways to work around the
>> ] > deficiency. However having a native function to generate a hostmask
>> ] > from a CIDR value is a natural extension to the existing inet
>> ] > functions already in PostgreSQL.
>> ] >
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
> + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania
> 19073
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org
>
--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: ler(at)lerctr(dot)org
US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ed Loehr | 2003-03-21 21:02:17 | Re: 32/64-bit transaction IDs? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-03-21 20:46:02 | Re: FW: New function - hostmask |