On 21 Feb 2013, at 02:46, Carlos M. martinez
carlosm3...@gmail.commailto:carlosm3...@gmail.com wrote:
Wasn't the 'evil bit' able to hold the value 2 ?
Use all evil bits for IP addresses and we'll soon have no need for IPv6.
Geoff Huston and I wrote a draft to use the evil bit to indicate the
On Feb 20, 2013, at 9:46 PM, Carlos M. martinez carlosm3...@gmail.com wrote:
Wasn't the 'evil bit' able to hold the value 2 ?
Yes, but we need an RFC for that. From RFC 3514:
6. IANA Considerations
This document defines the behavior of security elements for the 0x0
and 0x1 values of
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 16, 2013, at 2:02 AM, Patrik Fältström p...@frobbit.se wrote:
On 15 feb 2013, at 23:45, Warren Kumari war...@kumari.net wrote:
Sure -- the DNS protocol *cannot* handle any value in the octets -- in
fact, there are an *infinite* number of values it cannot handle
On 15 feb 2013, at 23:45, Warren Kumari war...@kumari.net wrote:
Sure -- the DNS protocol *cannot* handle any value in the octets -- in
fact, there are an *infinite* number of values it cannot handle *in the
octets*. For example, it cannot handle 257. It also cannot handle 321, nor
On 16 Feb 2013 07:03, Patrik Fältström p...@frobbit.se wrote:
On 15 feb 2013, at 23:45, Warren Kumari war...@kumari.net wrote:
Sure -- the DNS protocol *cannot* handle any value in the octets --
in fact, there are an *infinite* number of values it cannot handle *in the
octets*. For example,
