[e2e] Addressing format...network and mask

[Joe Touch]

Alok Dube wrote:

>>>why do I have to stick to "bit boundaries"?
>>>
>>>they are meant for routers to lookup faster
>>
>>They are the definition of Internet routes as well.
> 
> 
> yes....but its the prefix we care about...the masks are just there to make
> the FT guys happy.

The prefix is determined by the mask.

>>The result (and the problem) is that you end up with nondeterministic
>>routing, unless you define a different (non-Internet) tie-breaker, e.g.,
>>smallest range AND lowest start-of-range. I.e., redefine Internet
>>forwarding.
> 
> so given that as working, i could still pass start IP and end IP of the
> range.
> 
> its still backward compatible...incase one was to propogate subnets, one
> could still use the 1st and last made from the mask and build the tree...

You can't send your routes outside your subsystem, and they would need 
to propagate back through to the core Internet interchanges.

Joe