Re: [HACKERS] cidr

Thus spake Bruce Momjian
> Paul, yes, I have seen this address style on several machines, and I
> understand it supersede the class A,B,C addresses by allowing arbitrary
> netmasks.

Exactly.

> We can call it cidr.  That is fine.  I was just concerned that if we put
> it in contrib, that people who have never heard of cidr, like me, can
> recognize the usefulness of the type for their applications.

CIDR is getting to be pretty well known.  Most people who need the type
should understand it.

> Also, I would assume we can handle old-style non-cidr address just as
> cleanly, so both cidr and non-cidr can use the same type and functions.

Yes.  The old class system is just 3 special cases (Well, 4 really) of
CIDR.

> Yes, I agree, this is a HOT type, and should be installed in the default
> system.  Contrib is for testing/narrow audience, and this type certainly
> should be mainstream.  This is the third generation of the type, with a
> wide audience.  int8 is also coming into the main tree via Thomas.

I missed some of the earlier discussion.  Is there going to be a separate
IP type or is that just x.x.x.x/32?  I like the idea of a host type as
well.  I would love to sort my IPs and have 198.96.119.99 precede
198.96.119.100.

--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@{druid|vex}.net>   |  Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/                |  and a sheep voting on
+1 416 424 2871     (DoD#0082)    (eNTP)   |  what's for dinner.