[ipv6calc] Suggested output format

Lionel Elie Mamane lionel at mamane.lu
Thu Apr 3 21:15:16 CEST 2003

On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 08:29:37PM +0200, Peter Bieringer wrote:

> <lionel at mamane.lu> wrote:

>> ipv6calc currently doesn't support the following format:

>> network byte order, in octal notation with \-escaping

>> E.g. 2001:888:19f0:0:210:5aff:fe45:9b17 would be:
>> \40\1\10\210\31\360\0\0\2\20\132\377\376\105\233\27

>> There is a non-zero "market" for this, as I felt the need enough to
>> write a little program that does just this: Take an address, and
>> translate it to that format :-)

> Hmm, never seen. Where is the non-zero "market" located?

Well, OK, here is why I once wanted this format:

 - My mamane.lu domain is hosted, DNS-wise by a host running tinydns
 - I wanted to have AAAA records

And to have AAAA records with (unpatched, pure) tinydns, you need the
IP address in this format.

> Do you have the capabilities to enhance ipv6calc by yourself and
> submit patches?

Hmm... Probably. I can't guarantee it will be "good style" C,
though. I'm not really a C hacker.

> If nit, I can do it, but it would need some time (let me say 4
> weeks).

Oh, take your time. As I told you, I already have written a program
that outputs IP's in that format, so I'm in no hurry.

> BTW: should there be a difference between full expanded, expanded or
> compressed format?

No, just the 16 bytes, raw, each in octal notation with '\'

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 240 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.deepspace6.net/pipermail/ipv6calc/attachments/20030403/e9beed75/attachment.bin 

More information about the ipv6calc mailing list