[Ietf-not43] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-crisp-internet-resource-number-req-00.txt

[David Blacka]

On Thursday 21 August 2003 04:09 am, Shane Kerr wrote:

> But maybe that's not what you mean.  Is the problem specifying the 
> range and doing a search rather than a simple lookup?  The address 
> space is not the same as the domain space.  We actually need to be 
> able to have the semantics that I described in terms of looking for 
> parent/child relationships and having abritrary values for searches.

Shane, how important is it that *all* of those searches are done with 
arbitrary ranges?  In particular, I am wondering if the "-m" query, for 
instance, could be started with a known network block (identified by 
handle, for instance) instead of an arbitrary range?  It occurs to me that 
if "-m" where queries by network block handle, implementations could 
pre-calculate the results.

A followup question might be: would it be useful for any of the IP searches 
to start with a network block identifier, in addition?

-- 
David Blacka    <davidb at verisignlabs.com> 
Sr. Engineer    Verisign Applied Research