On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 10:56:35AM +0100, Ignatios Souvatzis said:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 02:03:27AM -0500, alexis@panix.com wrote:
> > 
> > That aside, why repeat this info at all?
> > 
> > Is there ever any case where the address will not be part of the network (at
> > least in IPv[46]? Why not just this:
> > 
> > Name  Mtu   Network &&/|| Address              Ipkts Ierrs    Opkts Oerrs Colls
> > sm1   1500  <Link>        00:00:86:05:80:fa     2358     0     2581     0    38
> > sm1   1500  fe80:1::200:86ff:fe05:80fa/64       2358     0     2581     0    38
> 
> 
> For IPv6, this sounds ok.
> 
> For IPv4, there are some people out there who use (or at least used)
> non-contiguous netmasks. 
> 
> But then, the old nestat also didn't provide this information, so it
> doesn't really matter.

Easy enough... For those rare cases, if you even want to bother, just
write it like "192.168.1.1/0xffffffe4" or whatever, and just let the line
run out. People using noncontiguous netmasks are going to be used to a lot
worse than just long-line output. :-)

/a

---
Alexis Rosen
PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC.
alexis@panix.com