I'm actually not sure if CIDR submasks can be used for IPv6 addresses.
I am also not really used to IPv6 yet. :)
At least for IPv4 addresses, I believe CIDR submask is what users want.
2008-03-13 (목), 08:42 +0100, Niklas Gustavsson 쓰시길:
> Now, this is certainly not my area of expertise so bare with me. Isn't
> CIDR submasks only for IP4 addresses? Also, they can not represent
any
> range in IP4 but blocking on subnets is probably what users need,
> right?
>
> /niklas
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 4:13 AM, 이희승 (Trustin Lee)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > By using submask, we can merge blacklist range and blacklist,
because a
> > single IP address can be represented with 32-bit submask (i.e.
> > 192.168.10.25/32 = 192.168.10.25).
> >
> > 2008-03-12 (수), 20:39 -0400, Mark Webb 쓰시길:
> >
> > > Couple points to make:
> > >
> > > 1. Why make a blacklist range and a blacklist. Why not just
add the
> > > range to the blacklist?
> > > 2. Should there be more synchronizing of the adding/removing
and the
> > > check for blocked addresses? What happens if an add and a
check for a
> > > blocked address happen at the same time?
> > >
> > > --Mark
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Niklas Gustavsson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Niklas Gustavsson
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > Cool, so I'll add it and ask for a review when its in SVN.
> > > >
> > > > Alright, the code is in (rev 636538), have a go at it. I'm
particulary
> > > > interested in a review of the IP comparison code, not sure I
got it
> > > > correct.
> > > >
> > > > /niklas
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > --
> >
> >
> > Trustin Lee - Principal Software Engineer, JBoss, Red Hat
> > --
> > what we call human nature is actually human habit
> > --
> > http://gleamynode.net/
> >
--
Trustin Lee - Principal Software Engineer, JBoss, Red Hat
--
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
