Am Mittwoch, 29. März 2006 09:20 schrieb mouss: > This somewhat defeats the "minimum surprise" principle. > > In "old practice", 10.1=10.0.0.1 (a.b = 256^3 * a + b), and not > 10.1.0.0. ping 127.1 still works on (some|most) platforms. (telnet 127.1 > works less). > > > Wouldn't it be better to just ignore such IPs (with a warning)?
That would really be nice. If you guys weren't as helpful as you are I would probably already be quite disappointed about all this. The way I see it, there is little need for "10" being recognized as "10.0.0.1" when specifying IP ranges. You may offer it but a warning in this case would be very helpful. We had several people here doing that mistake independent from each other. The initial config was done by our IT guys and I did it again since I wanted to be sure it is OK before I start debugging the problem. All versions I've seen contain this 'error' so it can't be this rare. Greetings... Stephan
pgp4fQwwM8uMs.pgp
Description: PGP signature
