APNIC Allocated 14/8, 223/8 today

Vincent Hoffman jhary at unsane.co.uk
Wed Apr 14 09:35:28 CDT 2010


On 14/04/2010 13:45, Dave Hart wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 09:20 UTC, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>   
>> On 14/04/2010 08:06, Srinivas Chendi <sunny at apnic.net> wrote to SANOG:
>>     
>>>     014/8
>>>     223/8
>>>       
>> Sunny,
>>
>> Please be careful about how you write this. "014" is formally an octal
>> representation, and what you've written there actually means that APNIC has
>> received 12/8 (= octal 014).
>>
>> Nick
>>     
> Nick,
>
> My eyebrow raised at the leading zero as well, but I'd call it
> ambiguous.  0x14 is unambiguously decimal 20, but 014 is only
> unambiguous in a context that defines leading zero as implying octal.
> For a C program relying on the runtime to convert text to numeric
> representation, it depends.  sscanf("%d", &myint) will convert 014 to
> decimal 14, "%i" gets decimal 12.
>
> I personally hunt down and kill %i and other octal-assuming code when
> I see it, except where octal is conventional.  To my eyes, 0xFF (or
> FF) screams "all bits lit" while 0377 (or 377) only hesitantly clears
> its throat.  Moreover, I assume computers will be used by people who
> have never had reason to believe a leading zero implies base 8, and I
> find no joy in forcing them to learn that quirk of computing history.
>   

On an up to date OSX install (and Centos linux and FreeBSD)
(15:23:17 <~>) 0 $ ping 014.0.0.1
PING 014.0.0.1 (12.0.0.1): 56 data bytes
Request timeout for icmp_seq 0

>From windows 2003 servert

C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator>ping 014.0.0.01
Pinging 12.0.0.1 with 32 bytes of data:


wget (on linux and freebsd)

(15:26:02 <~>) 0 $ wget 014.0.0.1
--2010-04-14 15:26:06--  http://014.0.0.1/
Connecting to 014.0.0.1|12.0.0.1|:80...

Oddly on OSX it doesnt take it as octal
(15:27:30 <~>) 130 $ wget 014.0.0.1
--2010-04-14 15:27:31--  http://014.0.0.1/
Connecting to 014.0.0.1 (014.0.0.1)|14.0.0.1|:80...


When it comes to IP addresses, its not history, its important :)

Vince
> Take care,
> Dave Hart
>   





More information about the NANOG mailing list