71–80 of 90 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a legitimate reason why to obfuscate an ip address?
To get around something that is otherwise blocking it? Seems useful as part of, for example, pentesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is just a convention from BSD, and is not even POSIX compliant. However, 'ping 1.1' is a convenient shortcut (actually pings 1.0.0.1). iproute2 and systemd do not use inet_aton and don't follow this BSD4.2 convention and instead parse it as '1.1.0.0' or not at all.
> However, 'ping 1.1' is a convenient shortcut (actually pings 1.0.0.1). Convenient for who!? that one guy that put his home network in 10.0.0 class ?
[0] https://1.0.0.1/
Yes, weird formats that no one has used in about 3 decades (if they even used them then) are still supported. These include just about every way you can think of to encode a 32 bit IP address into between 1-4 groups. Cool.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is just a convention from BSD, and is not even POSIX compliant. However, 'ping 1.1' is a convenient shortcut (actually pings 1.0.0.1). iproute2 and systemd do not use inet_aton and don't follow this BSD4.2 convention and instead parse it as '1.1.0.0' or not at all.
> However, 'ping 1.1' is a convenient shortcut (actually pings 1.0.0.1). Convenient for who!? that one guy that put his home network in 10.0.0 class ?
I chose 10, for simpler segmentation in my head primarily as I have a lot of devices in my house (10...n), less chance of conflict as devices come online (devices i connect often are coded to 192, VPNs, etc.), helps with my VPNs between my locations.
I like how variants of this have been discussed on here about 5 times in the last month. Yes, weird formats that no one has used in about 3 decades (if they even used them then) are still supported. These include just about every way you can think of to encode a 32 bit IP address into between 1-4 groups. Cool.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> However, 'ping 1.1' is a convenient shortcut (actually pings 1.0.0.1). Convenient for who!? that one guy that put his home network in 10.0.0 class ?
Hey now, what is wrong with 10. class at home ;-)? I chose 10, for simpler segmentation in my head primarily as I have a lot of devices in my house (10. . .n), less chance of conflict as devices come online (devices i connect often are coded to 192, VPNs, etc.), helps with my VPNs between my locations.
For similar reason we also steered away from home router area of 192.168.X.X for our company network stuff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is just a convention from BSD, and is not even POSIX compliant. However, 'ping 1.1' is a convenient shortcut (actually pings 1.0.0.1). iproute2 and systemd do not use inet_aton and don't follow this BSD4.2 convention and instead parse it as '1.1.0.0' or not at all.
> However, 'ping 1.1' is a convenient shortcut (actually pings 1.0.0.1). Convenient for who!? that one guy that put his home network in 10.0.0 class ?