Why can't we simply compare [IP::client_addr] on its own? I'm a bit confused as to why IP::addr has to be used...the thread below is what peaked my curiosity:
http://devcentral.f5.com/Community/GroupDetails/tabid/1082223/asg/50/afv/topic/aft/1172675/aff/5/showtab/groupforums/Default.aspx
24-Jun-201011:08 - last edited on 31-May-202316:07 by JimmyPackets
[IP::addr] - Performs comparison of IP address/subnet/supernet to IP address/subnet/supernet.
In the example they are asking if incoming Client IP Address is contained within any of the listed subnets, then send that traffic to a specific pool, not the one tied to the Virtual Server:
I was looking for a post from unRuleY which had more detail, but couldn't find it. I believe IP::addr does a more efficient byte comparison than you could do with a string comparison. And as Michael points out, IP::addr allows you to do CIDR comparisons that you couldn't easily do with string operations.
I was looking for a post from unRuleY which had more detail, but couldn't find it. I believe IP::addr does a more efficient byte comparison than you could do with a string comparison. And as Michael points out, IP::addr allows you to do CIDR comparisons that you couldn't easily do with string operations.
Aaron
Most of my comparisons are comparing client_addr or server_addr to address-type datagroups which contain both networks and hosts...is there any benefit to using [IP::addr[IP::server_addr]] or should I just save myself the characters?
I expect [IP::addr $ip] would return 1 if $ip was an IP address and a runtime error if it's not. So I don't see any reason to use that. Running a class command (class, matchclass, etc) with an IP address/network against an address type datagroup should use a byte comparison and be more efficient than a string comparison.
