bonito@nis.garr.it (Antonio_Blasco Bonito) writes: * > * > As Tony already said we'd rather not do that right now to avoid valatilit * y * > in database semantics. Please note that this will be fixed automatically * > and in a very general manner once the database goes classless! * > * > Suggestion: The dom-net field is a "hint" field only. It does not hurt at * all * > to list the whole network even if only part of it is used by the particul * ar * > domain. One net can appear in several domain objects. * > * > Daniel * * In principle I agree, but to apply your suggestion we would have to change * many entries which were written under the assumption that subnetworks were * allowed in dom-net... * We will rewrite dom-net: as remarks: dom-net: unless you can give us a piec * e * of perl software (to put before the sintax checker) which converts from * "subnet" to "whole net". Perl programmers are a very scarse resource here.. * . Okay, seeing as I seemed a bit harsh yesterday (wasn't intended). Here is a piece of perl that do it. Just did this in a few mins but should do it. Just pipe it through. Something like cat object | perl this-prog while (<>) { chop; if(/^di:/ || /^dom-net:/) { ($tmp,$value) = split (/\s+/, $_, 2); printf "%-10s", $tmp; @list = split(/\s+/,$value); foreach $j (0..$#list) { $net = &munge($list[$j]); printf " %s", $net; } print "\n"; next; } else { printf "%s\n", $_; } } sub munge { local($str) = @_; local($ind) = 0; local($val) = ""; local(@add) = split(/\./, $str); foreach $ind (0..$#add) { if ($add[0] < 128) { $val = "$add[0]".".0.0.0"; return $val; } if ($add[0] < 192) { $val = "$add[0]"."."."$add[1]".".0.0"; return $val; } if ($add[0] < 224) { $val = "$add[0]"."."."$add[1]"."."."$add[2]".".0"; return $val; } } } Cheers, --Tony.