Re: [HACKERS] Re: CIDR/IP types. Was: [GENERAL] big numbers

On Sat, 3 Oct 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Merged into the current source tree. Please test.
>
>
> > Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> >
> > > Is this the version you want me to install in the current source tree?
> >
> > Yup. It seems to work right, so it's what I'm using right now. As
> > soon as I've got an IPV6 kit installed here, I'll expand it with code
> > to handle that data type -- as you can see, I've left comments all
> > over the code showing what needs to be done for that. I reckon the
> > thing to do is for you to get it properly into the tree, and then I'll
> > do further maintenance on that code, and send patches.
> >
> > The SQL code to set up indexing capability doesn't work after your
> > changes to add OIDs to various names, but I guess that's irrelevant
> > when you integrate it into the base system, right? As for the MAC
> > level ethernet address stuff, if you want to add that as well, I guess
> > we should consider replacing the hard-coded table of manufacturers
> > with a table in template1 -- that is the SQL way, after all. Also,
> > the names of these types should maybe be changed? I use "ipaddr" and
> > "macaddr", but I can't remember if consensus was reached on whether
> > the IP address data type should be "cidr", or "inet", or what... If

*Please* make the appropriate changes and submit a patch...it
should be listed as CIDR, not as IPADDR. MACADDR, IMHO, is okay, as its
the only way I've ever heard of it being referred...but I do not consider
IPADDR to be correct terminology...

Marc G. Fournier scrappy(at)hub(dot)org
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
scrappy(at){postgresql|isc}.org ICQ#7615664