Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I especially love it when address parsers on the same OS don't agree:

http://openbsd-archive.7691.n7.nabble.com/inet-net-pton-seem...



> https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-bugs&m=124425104531501&w=2

Love it! No conversation about SUS is complete without Theo bashing up the absurdity of some historic bugs being documented as features. :-)

---

I do like the hex specification, though. Especially in the age of /29 and such, it's way easier to deal with space using such notation than the decimal numbers, which make little sense for network boundaries in such case. It looks like ping supports most of these (try `ping 0x08080808`, or `ping 0x08.0x080808`, but note that 0x0808.0x0808 is not valid, only 0x08.0x08.0x0808 would be), but `dig @` doesn't.

BTW, I guess this finally explains why the netmask is often shown as `inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000` on the BSDs, which is actually a valid IP address notation, as it turns out!




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: