Re: [HACKERS] cidr

>     With that in mind, can we work at having a 'cidr' type as part of
> the overall system, vs contrib?  I know that *I* would use it alot more if
> I didn't have to think of loading it seperately...and I can think of at
> least two of my projects that I'd use it in...

me too.  i'm already using it in fact.  i just don't know how to make it
indexable.  having it be a standard type, with someone who knows postgres
making it indexable, would be really great for the MAPS project and for
some WHOIS/LDAP stuff we're doing here.

>     Considering that we are now up to three ppl out there that are
> willing to work on this, I think we should be able to come up with a
> 'consensus' as to what we are going to be considering "the standard" for
> the base implementation?

i remain ready to help anyone who promises to drive this thing.  and while
i feel that "cidr" is the right name, i don't feel it strongly enough to
refuse to help unless that name is chosen.  i need the functionality, and
if it appears under some other name i will use it under that name.