nanog mailing list archives
Re: names are not numbers, was IPv4 address length technical design
From: "John Levine" <johnl () iecc com>
Date: 7 Oct 2012 01:14:37 -0000
In article <20592.28334.622769.539587 () world std com> you write:
It's occured to you that FQDNs contain some structured information, no?
Hey, I've got a great idea. Let's lose this silly phone number portability nonsense and use phone numbers as routes. I mean, anyone who moves and takes his cell phone with him has only himself to blame, right? R's, John
Current thread:
- Re: IPv4 address length technical design, (continued)
- Re: IPv4 address length technical design Barry Shein (Oct 06)
- Re: IPv4 address length technical design George Herbert (Oct 06)
- Re: IPv4 address length technical design Barry Shein (Oct 06)
- Re: IPv4 address length technical design Cutler James R (Oct 06)
- Re: IPv4 address length technical design Barry Shein (Oct 07)
- Re: IPv4 address length technical design Steven Noble (Oct 07)
- RE: IPv4 address length technical design Paul Vinciguerra (Oct 07)
- Re: IPv4 address length technical design William Herrin (Oct 07)
- Re: IPv4 address length technical design George Herbert (Oct 07)
- Re: IPv4 address length technical design Jay Ashworth (Oct 07)
- Re: names are not numbers, was IPv4 address length technical design John Levine (Oct 06)
- Re: names are not numbers, was IPv4 address length technical design Joe Hamelin (Oct 06)
- Re: names are not numbers, was IPv4 address length technical design Barry Shein (Oct 07)
- Re: IPv4 address length technical design William Herrin (Oct 07)
- Re: IPv4 address length technical design Tony Finch (Oct 08)