Now, this is certainly not my area of expertise so bare with me. Isn't CIDR submasks only for IP4 addresses? Also, they can not represent any range in IP4 but blocking on subnets is probably what users need, right?
/niklas On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 4:13 AM, 이희승 (Trustin Lee) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > By using submask, we can merge blacklist range and blacklist, because a > single IP address can be represented with 32-bit submask (i.e. > 192.168.10.25/32 = 192.168.10.25). > > 2008-03-12 (수), 20:39 -0400, Mark Webb 쓰시길: > > > Couple points to make: > > > > 1. Why make a blacklist range and a blacklist. Why not just add the > > range to the blacklist? > > 2. Should there be more synchronizing of the adding/removing and the > > check for blocked addresses? What happens if an add and a check for a > > blocked address happen at the same time? > > > > --Mark > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Niklas Gustavsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Niklas Gustavsson > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Cool, so I'll add it and ask for a review when its in SVN. > > > > > > Alright, the code is in (rev 636538), have a go at it. I'm particulary > > > interested in a review of the IP comparison code, not sure I got it > > > correct. > > > > > > /niklas > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Trustin Lee - Principal Software Engineer, JBoss, Red Hat > -- > what we call human nature is actually human habit > -- > http://gleamynode.net/ >
