On Wed, 23 Jun 1999, Philip Hazel wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Hugh Sasse wrote:
>
> > That is what it says you can do. I was talking about
> > 198.168.(20|21|22|71).0/24 which may or may not be legal.
>
> It's not legal. You have to write it as
>
> 198.168.20.0/24:198.168.21.0/24:198.168.22.0/24:198.168.71.0/24
Ok, thanks for the clarification. Nigel has a good
point though -- I forgot to quote the dots in that regexp!
Would the C-shell's "{,,}" be a useful thing to have instead?
Less rope to hang oneself with, possibly easier to detect
in parsing ( [{},] is disjoint from [\d/:\.] ), but could still
do what I was looking for:
198.168.{20,21,22,71}.0/24
which is still clear that these are all subdomains of the
same thing? Given that IP addresses are to be treated
differently from names (which can be regexp'd), maybe
a different syntax is acceptable.
Caveat: "feeping creaturism" :-)
>
> --
> Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
> ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
Hugh
hgs@???
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
