Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Thiemo Seufer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-12-23 20:12]: > > > I wanted to configure a static address and made a typo and wrote > > > "10.0.144". netcfg didn't spot this at all, and only failed at the > > > end when bringing up the network, saying "Erorr while activating the > > > network" and nothing more. I had no idea what was wrong, until I > > > noticed the silly typo. Please make sure that the IP address is well > > > formed, and if it is not, complain. > > > > IIRC 10.0.144 _is_ a well formed IP address. It's a rememnant from > > classful addressing, being a shortcut for 10.0.0.144. > > Hmm, indeed, putting 10.0.144 in /etc/network/interfaces seems to > work. However, during netcfg I definitely got an error and I'm pretty > sure it was due to the 10.0.144 address.
Then there's a bug which should get fixed. > However, how many people really use addresses like 10.0.144? I still > think sanity checking for 4 0-256 values separated by dots is a good > idea, especially for inexperienced people. A warning might be appropriate nowadays, the days of classful addressing are over. Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
