APNIC Allocated 14/8, 223/8 today

Neil Harris neil at tonal.clara.co.uk
Wed Apr 14 18:02:20 CDT 2010


On 14/04/10 15:54, Dave Hart wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 14:35 UTC, Vincent Hoffman wrote:
>
>> PING 014.0.0.1 (12.0.0.1): 56 data bytes
>> C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator>ping 014.0.0.01
>> Pinging 12.0.0.1 with 32 bytes of data:
>> Connecting to 014.0.0.1|12.0.0.1|:80...
>> Connecting to 014.0.0.1 (014.0.0.1)|14.0.0.1|:80...
>>
>> When it comes to IP addresses, its not history, its important :)
>>
> Good point.  In most of these classic utility contexts, octal is
> generally accepted.  32-bit unsigned decimal representation has
> provided obfuscation for fun and profit in HTTP URIs.  I'm sure you
> can find some software that still accepts it, and some that doesn't.
> For me, with no proxy, Chrome and IE both accept a non-dotted numeric
> IPv4 URI, but rewrite it in the address bar to the familiar dotted
> quad format.  FireFox shows an error page that appears equivalent to:
> <h1>Bad Request (Invalid Hostname)</h1>
>
> FireFox is probably violating some spec.  Thankfully.
>
> Cheers,
> Dave Hart
>
>
>

This is a historical issue with inet_aton(). See 
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-main-ipaddr-text-rep-00 for more 
details on the history behind this.

Firefox bug 554596 addresses this problem.

-- N.





More information about the NANOG mailing list