[rbldnsd] Excluding a CIDR range

[furio ercolessi]

On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 10:15:33AM +1100, Matthew Sullivan wrote:
> IIRC its based on how the structures are held within rbldnsd and Michael 
> also asked previously of what should happen if we see:
> 
> 1.2/16
> !1.2/16
> 
> or
> 
> !1.2/16
> 1.2/16

I would expect this to be "1.2/16 listed" for the regular exclude
operator, and "1.2/16 not listed" for the superexclude operator,
independently from the order.
Superexclude should not replace the current exclude, so it should
be notated differently.  Let us temporarily indicate it with !!

> At this point remember that everyone has their own zone format, eg SORBS 
> will create the zones with includes first and excludes afterwards.  Also 
> what do you do if you see:
> 
> 1/8
> !1.2/16
> 1.2.3/24
> 
> Personally I would expect, to exclude 1.2/16 from 1/8 but include 
> 1.2.3/24 specifically.... 

I agree (this is what it does, right?), but

1/8
!!1.2/16
1.2.3/24

should not list 1.2.3/24, because !!1.2/16 wins -- it is a superexclude.

> seems a reasonable request, but how about if 
> we do this:
> 
> 1/8
> 1.2.3/24
> !1.2/16
> 
> Would this be handled differently?

I would not expect the result depend on the order under any circumstance.

> .... adn that not even touching on the technical reasons why this won't 
> work in the current version of rbldnsd.  I am sure Michael will explain 
> in detail the issue when it is day light in Russia ;-)

I surely got quite a few explanations from him when it was deep night 
in Russia ;-)

furio