33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care?

Fri Jul 30 03:55:30 UTC 2010

On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 23:45:03 EDT, Atticus said:
> What world do live in? Yes, we extend the life of IPv4 by increasing the
> numeric range. As for "only needing port 80", I'm not really sure where
> you've been for the last decade or so. 

I hate to say this, but all of you who are actually thinking about stealing
bits from IPv4 headers when IPv6 is already here: Look who started the "ONE bit
or TWO bits" thread.  YHBT. HAND.  ;)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 227 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20100729/b7c74df7/attachment.sig>