> Lett Markus Werner <markus.werner / wobcom.de>
> Aihe: Re: Standardlib "ipaddr.rb"
> 
> On Wednesday 05 January 2005 14:59, Florian G. Pflug wrote:
> Hi Florian,
> 
> > IpNetwork: Represents a network/ip-prefix, e.g.
> > 	192.168.0.0/16, or
> > 	192.168.1.0/24, but not 192.168.1.1/24, because it's not a
> > 	network.
> > IpAddress: Represents an ip-address, without netmask
> > IpInterface: Represents an ip-address in a certain network, e.g
> > 	192.168.1.1/24.
> > 	I'm not sure if 192.168.0.0 is a valid ip-address in the
> > 	192.168.0.0/24 network...
> 
> Just to think about : 192.168.1.1/32 or fe00::1/128 is a valid notation for a 
> single IP Address.

Not really. There is no such IP address as 192.168.1.1/32. There's
just the IP address 192.168.1.1 and the subnet it may be a part of.

> I will write my own Classes for IP Addresses now, and hope that the IPAddr lib 
> get changed in the future. 

I understand the confusion, but the proper solution is not to change
IPAddr to store your notation but to create two separate classes, 
IPAddr and Subnet (or CIDR or whatever). The reason for this is that
any entity that needs to know what subnet should be used to interpret
a given IP address should /already know/ what that subnet is.

E