der Mouse wrote:
and most modern network hardware will turn their nose up at them
AFAIK.
IMO anything that pretends to implement IPv4 but which doesn't do
noncontiguous netasks is simply broken, I don't care whether it comes
from Cisco or Netgear or NetBSD.
Not, I suppose, that anyone necessarily cares what I consider broken.
Slow-path them. Require a sysctl switch (the way we do for source
routes). Fine. But outright desupport them? I'd call that a bug,
even if it is done deliberately.
I believe that non-contiguous netmasks actually are illegal nowadays.
They became illegal when CIDR was implemented.
That said, it might be worth having a way to enable the legacy view of
network address classes and netmasks, if someone wants to...?
Johnny
