Well can't we don't care bit ourselves around to masking or something consistent? It is confusing at times although it's interesting to know that's the origin.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Li Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 11:05 PM To: Brian McMahon Cc: cisco-nsp Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Access-list Question On May 15, 2007, at 10:00 PM, Brian McMahon wrote: > My personal theory (SWAG) is that, long ago in the Elder Days of > single-digit IOS version numbers, some clever programmer figured out > a way to save a couple of processor cycles per ACL by coding the > bitmask this way around -- an efficiency gain that has been easily > swamped over the years by the confusion it's created, but that is now > WAY TOO LATE to fix. Close. You have the timing right. The modeling was based on "don't care bits" as commonly found in hardware design. Netmasks hadn't really caught on as of then. Tony _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
