nanog mailing list archives
Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc
From: bmanning () ISI EDU
Date: Tue, 16 May 1995 16:03:26 -0700 (PDT)
No, I think he means longer. IN-ADDR.ARPA can only be delegated on octet boundaries, so IN-ADDR for /16 and shorter prefixes will be delegated in /16 chunks. IN-ADDR for prefixes longer than /16 must still be maintained by the root, since they cannot be delegated.
Silly me. I've been working with a tree that does non-octet delegations for a few weeks and it has warpped my thinking. You are correct that in todays world, longer is right. Sorry for the confusion. -- --bill
Current thread:
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Vince Fuller (May 16)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Mark Kosters (May 16)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Draft internic ip allocation doc Mark Kosters (May 16)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc bmanning (May 16)
- Message not available
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Randy Bush (May 17)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Paul Holbrook (May 17)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Vince Fuller (May 16)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc bmanning (May 16)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Louis A. Mamakos (May 16)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Vadim Antonov (May 16)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc bmanning (May 17)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc David R Conrad (May 18)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Mark Kosters (May 17)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc bmanning (May 17)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Juha Heinanen (May 18)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Louis A. Mamakos (May 17)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Louis A. Mamakos (May 17)