Re: ifconfig v2

[Ignatios Souvatzis <is%netbsd.org@localhost>]

Hi,

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:08:12AM -0400, Mouse wrote:
> >> Why?  What harm are [noncontiguous netmasks] doing that outweighs
> >> (to you) breaking an occasionally useful (if little-used) facility
> >> that's been there pretty much since day one?
> 
> > No one can agree what they are supposed to mean.
> 
> Hm?  I thought they meant what contiguous netmasks do:
> "on-net" = "dst address & mask == local address & mask" (mutatis
> mutandis for "local address" for things like routes).  Who thinks they
> mean anything else?

Uhm...

the interesting case is, what happens when you have two interfaces with 
addresses/netmasks


1.2.0.1/255.255.0.255   (0xffff00ff)
1.2.1.0/255.255.15.240  (0xffff0ff0)

and you send a packet to 1.2.0.16 ?

What about

1.2.0.1/255.255.8.255   (0xffff08ff)
1.2.1.0/255.255.15.241  (0xffff0ff1)    ?

(Yes, I must admit that I've seen one use of them where only one
interface was involved, and the situation on the router wasn't
ambiguous.)

Regards,
        -is