On 03/04/14 08:14, David Beveridge wrote: >> Prefix length has to be greater than or equal to 64, is that what you >> mean? It's about implementation convenience. C doesn't provide a >> integer data type larger than 64 bits for doing masking. of the >> address-part. >> > > Fair enough. So I have a copy of dnsmasq running on my bind dns server > just to handle the synthetic reverse (which bind can't do), so each /64 > needs to be individually configured in dnsmasq. It's good to know why. > > I can't just get lazy and synth a whole /48 or /32. > Probably out of scope for what dnsmasq is designed for anyway.
That's what I told myself when I wrote the code, it's crazy to use arbitary-precision maths in a DNS daemon. Then a year later I implemented DNSSEC which uses public-key crypto, based in arbitrary-precision maths :-) Cheers, Simon. > > dave > >> Cheers, >> >> Simon. >> > > _______________________________________________ > Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list > Dnsmasqemail@example.com > http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss > _______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasqfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss