Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.protocols.tcp-ip    |    TCP and IP network protocols.    |    14,669 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 14,281 of 14,669    |
|    Jorgen Grahn to ElChino    |
|    Re: IPv6 prefix-length struggle    |
|    27 Nov 16 19:10:52    |
      From: grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se              On Sun, 2016-11-27, ElChino wrote:       > I'm having some troubles figuring out the CIDR "prefix length"       > of a IPv6 addresses range.       >       > Specifically, in some code that reads MaxMind's GeoIPv6.dat records,       > the low and high IP-numbers of IPv6-blocks are given like:       > IP-num low: 76:96:42:219::       > IP-num high: 76:96:42:219:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff       > (belonging to 'United States')       >       > I need to figure out how to print this using CIDR notation.       > E.g. if I have the 2 above addresses in       > struct in6_addr a, b;       >       > 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.              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?              /Jorgen              --        // Jorgen Grahn |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca