On 09/05/2012 11:30 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Dne 5.9.2012 10:04, Martin Kosek napsal(a):
We allowed IP addresses without network specification which lead
to unexpected results when the zone was being created. We should rather
strictly require the prefix/netmask specifying the IP network that
the reverse zone should be created for. This is already done in
Web UI.
A unit test exercising this new validation was added.
https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/2461
I don't like this much. I would suggest using CheckedIPAddress and not forcing
the user to enter the prefix length instead.
CheckedIPAddress uses a sensible default prefix length if one is not specified
(class-based for IPv4, /64 for IPv6) as opposed to IPNetwork (/32 for IPv4,
/128 for IPv6 - this causes the erroneous reverse zones to be created as
described in the ticket).
Hello,
I don't like automatic netmask guessing. I have met class-based guessing in
Windows (XP?) and I was forced to overwrite default mask all the time ...
IMHO there is no "sensible default prefix" in real world. I sitting on network
with /23 prefix right now. Also, I have never seen 10.x network with /8 prefix.
--
Petr^2 Spacek
_______________________________________________
Freeipa-devel mailing list
Freeipa-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
