Re: pg_hba.conf hostmask.

From: Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Kurt Roeckx <Q(at)ping(dot)be>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_hba.conf hostmask.
Date: 2003-02-03 01:37:38
Message-ID: Pine.NEB.4.51.0302031035300.368@angelic.cynic.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Yes, some have asked about this. My understanding was that CIDR
> (host/len) was mostly for networks, while hostname/mask was for hosts.
> Now, you can specify hosts using /32, but is is unusual? Maybe not.

Typically, if you have something like an access list where you're
specifying hosts or networks, you default the netmask to /32 if it's not
supplied.

However, if we're going to maintain backward compatability with the old
format (i.e., using a separately specified netmask in the next column if
no slash is present in the address column) we can't do that.

Personally, I'm all for breaking backwards compatability (as I usually
am :-)) but could quite easily live with specifying all most hosts as
"n.n.n.n/32" forever into the future, too.

cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2003-02-03 02:23:14 Re: PGP signing releases
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-02-03 01:09:23 Re: Interactive Documentation - how do you want it towork?