Re: 16 year old bug

[Rhialto <rhialto%falu.nl@localhost>]

On Tue 24 Aug 2010 at 11:10:55 -0400, der Mouse wrote:
> >>> I believe that non-contiguous netmasks actually are illegal nowadays.
> >> Cite?
> > RFC 4632 (CIDR Address Strategy), section 5.1:
> 
> ...which is titled "Rules for Route Advertisement".  (Also, 4632 is a
> BCP, not a standard.)
> 
> > "  An implementation following these rules should also be generalized,
> >    so that an arbitrary network number and mask are accepted for all
> >    routing destinations.  The only outstanding constraint is that the
> >    mask must be left contiguous."
> 
> With respect to route aggregation in advertisements (ie,
> exterally-visible behaviour).  See the second paragraph of 5.2.

Also (thinking perversely), this never says that the 1-bits in the mask
must be left-justified... a mask of 00111111 11111111 11000000 00000000
has the whole mask contiguous...

> /~\ The ASCII                           Mouse
-Olaf.
-- 
___ Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert  -- There's no point being grown-up if you 
\X/ rhialto/at/xs4all.nl    -- can't be childish sometimes. -The 4th Doctor