na...@studio442.com.au (Julien Goodwin) wrote: > > The first optimisation is to remove any supplied prefixes which are > > superfluous because they are already included in another supplied > > prefix. For example, 2001:67c:208c:10::/64 would be removed if > > 2001:67c:208c::/48 was also supplied. > > > > The second optimisation identifies adjacent prefixes that can be > > combined under a single, shorter-length prefix. For example, > > 2001:67c:208c::/48 and 2001:67c:208d::/48 can be combined into the > > single prefix 2001:67c:208c::/47. As an IPv4 exampl: 10.0.0.0/24 and > > 10.0.1.0/24 can be joined into 10.0.0.0/23. > > Will it catch cases like: > 10.0.0.0/24 10.0.1.0/24 10.0.2.0/23 -> 10.0.0.0/22
I guess the developers will have implemented a loop that runs until no more optimizations have been found. Which would of course catch it as Iteration 1 10.0.0.0/24 + 10.0.1.0/24 -> 10.0.0.0/23 Iteration 2 10.0.0.0/23 + 10.0.2.0/23 -> 10.0.0.0/22
