nanog mailing list archives
Re: NANOG Operational TTL Alert for 160-bit Headers (aka IPv4)
From: Leigh Porter <leigh.porter () ukbroadband com>
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 00:12:47 +0000
He has a point. The IPv4 exhaustion problem was manufactured by the illuminati to usher in their IPv6 protocol (note the use of the number 6, the number if the beast. Combined with the tuple of source, destination address and protocol type this is 666!). The illuminati want us to deploy IPv6 so they can use it to control people ready for the new world order. It was all predicted by Nostradamus. Innit. -- Leigh Porter On 3 Mar 2012, at 23:27, "Robert Glover" <robertg () garlic com> wrote:
Someone get this man a Xanax! -----Original message----- From: Guru NANOG <nanog.guru () gmail com> To: nanog <nanog () nanog org> Sent: 2012 Mar, Sun, 4 00:01:04 GMT+00:00 Subject: NANOG Operational TTL Alert for 160-bit Headers (aka IPv4) Common Misconception - IPv4 is Out of Address Space NANOG Operational TTL Alert for 160-bit Headers (aka IPv4) The 8-bit TTL field is reduced to 4-bits plus two 11 bits stuck at 1 for a long time The new 8-bit fields are: SD11TTTT Packets without the 11 will enter Deep Packet Inspection processing (slow) SD are new Source and Destination Address bits set via the generic AAAA 128-bit records 4+8+12+30+6 = 60 + 68 = 128 VRHL+111.T1.000+Port12+30+Frag6 T1 sets the TTL bits - Use T0 at your own risk - VRHL=0101=5 NANOG.GURU.☺ ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com ______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com ______________________________________________________________________
Current thread:
- NANOG Operational TTL Alert for 160-bit Headers (aka IPv4) Guru NANOG (Mar 03)
- Re: NANOG Operational TTL Alert for 160-bit Headers (aka IPv4) Robert Glover (Mar 03)
- Re: NANOG Operational TTL Alert for 160-bit Headers (aka IPv4) Leigh Porter (Mar 03)
- Re: NANOG Operational TTL Alert for 160-bit Headers (aka IPv4) Mark Gauvin (Mar 03)
- Re: NANOG Operational TTL Alert for 160-bit Headers (aka IPv4) Jay Hennigan (Mar 03)
- is 74.218.84.10 a road runner IP address? goemon (Mar 03)
- Message not available
- Re: is 74.218.84.10 a road runner IP address? Alex Conner (Mar 03)
- Re: is 74.218.84.10 a road runner IP address? goemon (Mar 03)
- is 74.218.84.10 a road runner IP address? goemon (Mar 03)
- Re: NANOG Operational TTL Alert for 160-bit Headers (aka IPv4) Robert Glover (Mar 03)