On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote:
Is 127.0.0.1 / ::1 the Internet version of 555?
Not according to the RFC:s.
Given the use of 555 in the (North American) TV world, and the
regularity with which IETF defines specific example resources of
various sorts,
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 06:35:35PM -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 20, 2011, at 6:29 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 08:44:50 +1100, Skeeve Stevens said:
On 2011.03.19. 23:40, Geoff Huston wrote:
On 19/03/2011, at 6:08 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011, Routing Analysis Role Account wrote:
Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs: 1207
Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table:
On 21/03/2011 06:04, Martin Millnert wrote:
I assume it has been discussed and rejected. Can anyone enlighten us on why?
RFC 3849?
Nick
Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote:
But I'm surprised 1918 space was used as well.
172.12.0.0 is not RFC 1918 but it is unallocated.
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at http://dotat.at/
Viking: Southwesterly 5 to 7, occasionally gale 8 in northwest Viking, veering
westerly 5 or
I would have used 192.0.2.0/24. It is the IPv4 version of
example.com.
--
Ina
Or even anything in 127.55.0.0 should be safe.
On Mar 20, 2011, at 11:04 PM, Martin Millnert wrote:
one would almost expect there'd be 555-equivalent
address spaces defined by the IETF already.
In IPv6, I would expect the documentation example (2001:db8::/32) would suffice
for the purpose.
Hi Guys,
I've been seeing latency from RCN via NYIIX to Tiscali to the west coast. It
seemed to have changed just last week, any known issues with RCN or Tiscali?
Packets Pings
Host
Surprised this was actually approved, but more so that this story seems to
have gone unnoticed on the list... I would have expected a lot more chatter
here -
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/03/icann-approves-xxx-red-light
-district-for-the-internet.ars
So the days of pointless TLDs
Hello,
We have opened a number of tickets in the SORBS DUHL system to notify
them of the use of a former dialup /24 for static assignments to no
avail. Anyone from SORBS reading this?
Thank you,
Chris Conn
B2B2C.ca
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 04:31:21PM -0400, TR Shaw said:
One might wonder about the quality of the mail admins that rely on SORBS
You might try http://www.au.sorbs.net/cgi-bin/support
One might also do other things that are to no avail,
one of such things is to read this and
Hello,
I don't know if this is the appropriate list for this kind of subject, so if
anyone knows another specific list, please tell me...
I'm analysing several DWDM designs to implement at my city, but I'm still a
bit confusing about the Metro acess design. I'm supposed to build a physical
ring
On 3/21/11 5:36 PM, Livio Zanol Puppim livio.zanol.pup...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello,
I don't know if this is the appropriate list for this kind of subject, so
if
anyone knows another specific list, please tell me...
I'm analysing several DWDM designs to implement at my city, but I'm still
a
bit
I don't rally care about the uptime at the spokes. It's not my
responsability to maintain the spokes sites, we'll just give communication
to our network.
I know that I'll have single point of failure in my topology, like having
just one HUB, but I just don't want a spoke interfering in the
14 matches
Mail list logo
