The Mathematical Reality of IP Addressin in IPv4...

Alex P. Rudnev alex at
Thu Aug 26 09:30:18 UTC 1999

> By distinguishing apparently identical IP addresses by using different
> subnet masks one can increase the number of IP addresses distinguishable by
> a 32-bit number to greater than 2^32.
No doubt. But... the IP packet have not _netmask_ field, and TCP/IP 
socket have not too. If you add this, it's easier to add extra address 

On the other hand, I can send the draft too -:). If we add 'PORT RANGE' 
field to the 'PTR' DNS record, and some trick to the 'xx.xx.xx.xx' 
address notation, we can split one IP address to the 4 - 8 hosts by 
allocating the different port ranges for every one. And it do not need to 
rewrite TCP stack and routers at all, only a little part in DNS and 
service resolver, or in the 'connect' and 'bind' function (and can be 
realised by the NAT just now. -:). There is not too big problem to 
increase IPv4 address space twise (cook one bit from the port field, and 
that's all).

Through I wonder why people are making so many noice aroung unexisting 
IPv6 and don't try to improve existing systems a little... IPv4 have a 
few opportunities to create milti-level address hierarchy:
- source routing
- port/address mapping
- netmask and AS numbers (for the routing only).

Through after SNMP, MLPS etc I wonder to nothing...

> Except for the problem that you need 32 extra bits to carry a mask or 5
> extra bits to carry the masklen.
> IETF should have waited until 2000/04/01 before posting this.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>  Mike Bird          Tel: 209-742-5000   FAX: 209-966-3117
>  President          POP: 209-742-5156   PGR: 209-742-9979 
>  Iron Mtn Systems

Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow
(+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 230-41-41, N 13729 (pager)
(+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)

More information about the NANOG mailing list