From: elchino@cnn.cn   
      
   Jorgen Grahn wrote:   
      
   >> I've cooked up this function after much head-scratching:   
   > ....   
   >> The above code (+inet_ntop(&a..)) will print "76:96:42:219::/64".   
   >> Does this make sense for you experts?   
   >   
   > I'm no expert and I've not read your code.  However, at least the   
   > /result/ is correct.  76:96:42:219:: and 76:96:42:219:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff   
   > differ after 4 identical words, i.e. 64 bits.   
      
   Incidentally, for that block "/64" was correct. But I think it should be:   
     return (128 - bits);   
   instead. Since AFAICS, prefix-length is the number of high-order bits in   
   the address that are fixed. No?   
      
   > The best thing would be if people stopped using any notation but   
   > addr/len.  Is there any reason to use first--last or address, mask   
   > today?  For IPv6?   
      
   Agree, not at all. But in that example, the IP-low + IP-high was   
   just how the MaxMind database stored the data (in binary).   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)