2010/1/11 Darren Albers <[email protected]>
> 2010/1/10 cee1 <[email protected]>: > > 2010/1/11 José Queiroz <[email protected]> > >> > >> > 3) lack of a proper notification of invalid inputs. > >> > >> Hmm... this is interesting. Can you explain it in more details? > >> > > Just a label above ip4_addr_label, see the attachment. > > > > Will you also calculate based on the mask if the address is a > broadcast or network id[1] and hence invalid? For example if I put > in 192.168.0.56 255.255.255.248 or 192.168.0.63 255.255.255.248 it > would be invalid. Or is this just a check that the IP has valid > ranges in it? > > Also shouldn't we at least tell people what to do if something is > incorrect? For example in your screenshot we could say: > "The value "256" is outside of a valid range, please validate the address" > > If we validate the subnet it could be: > "Your address is either a Broadcast address or network ID and hence is > invalid" > > [1]My old Cisco press books called this network id but I have seen > host id, subnet id, and others in use as the term for this.... > It currently doesn't tell people "why the inputs is invalid." The validation is simply done by calling inet_aton.
_______________________________________________ NetworkManager-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
