On August 22, 2015 11:58:03 AM EDT, Monty Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 08/21/2015 03:33 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
>> On 08/21/2015 02:34 PM, Sean M. Collins wrote:
>>> So - the tl;dr is that I don't think that we should accept inputs
>like
>>> the following:
>>>
>>> x -> 192
>>> x/y -> 10/8
>>> x.x/y -> 192.168/16
>>> x.x.x/y -> 192.168.0/24
>>>
>>> which are equivalent to::
>>>
>>> x.0.0.0/y -> 192.0.0.0/24
>>> x.0.0.0/y -> 10.0.0.0/8
>>> x.x.0.0/y -> 192.168.0.0/16
>>> x.x.x.0/y -> 192.168.0.0/24
>>
>> Agreed completely.
>
>++
>
>
>__________________________________________________________________________
>OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>Unsubscribe:
>[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
I've got a proof of concept patch for netaddr, I'll be reaching out to the
netaddr devs and use it to spur discussion.
https://github.com/sc68cal/netaddr/commit/7ccbfe40fe6be66228601977ded74781cf5cffd9
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
