> Paul A Vixie <paul(at)vix(dot)com> writes:
> 
> > if this is agreeable, i'll code it up and submit it here for testing
> > before i push it out in bind 8.1.3.  i really do agree with the
> > functionality we've drifted toward in this type -- if folks want to
> > express the netmask of a host address without getting in trouble for
> > a nonzero host part that's lost during parsing and storage, then
> > they jolly well ought to be able to do that.
> 
> I certainly agree.  We should then be able to switch very easily and
> cleanly to the use of these new input and output functions, and add
> the various utility functions that D'Arcy has outlined.  Should be
> quick work.
> 
> We should leave the type name as INET, I think.
> 
> Bruce/Marc: we're OK for 6.4 with this still, right?  Even if it takes
> a couple more days to get everything to fall into place?

I think so.  It does not affect people testing other things.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

• Re: [HACKERS] Re: inet/cidr/bind at 1998-10-11 11:06:26 from Tom Ivar Helbekkmo

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 1998-10-11 17:06:14
	Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Error messages crash backend
Previous:	From: Massimo Dal Zotto	Date: 1998-10-11 12:24:14
	Subject: Re: [HACKERS] backslash in psql output