nanog mailing list archives
Re: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 08:58:45 -0800
On Nov 19, 2010, at 12:57 AM, Richard Hartmann wrote:
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 07:00, <bmanning () vacation karoshi com> wrote:problem is, its not alwas ggoig to be two bytes...It's always two bytes, but people may choose to omit them. That is a social, not a (purely) technical, syntax, though.
It is always two bytes. A byte is not always an octet. Some machines do have byte sizes other than 8 bits, although few of them are likely to have IPv6 stacks, so, this may be an academic distinction at this point. Owen
Current thread:
- Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming Richard Hartmann (Nov 18)
- RE: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming George Bonser (Nov 18)
- Re: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming bmanning (Nov 18)
- Re: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming Richard Hartmann (Nov 19)
- RE: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming George Bonser (Nov 19)
- Re: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming David Israel (Nov 19)
- Re: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming Richard Hartmann (Nov 19)
- Re: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming Owen DeLong (Nov 19)
- Re: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming Richard Hartmann (Nov 19)
- Re: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming Owen DeLong (Nov 19)
- Re: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming Joel Jaeggli (Nov 19)
- Re: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming bmanning (Nov 18)
- RE: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming George Bonser (Nov 18)
- Re: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming Richard Hartmann (Nov 19)
- Re: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming William Pitcock (Nov 19)
- Re: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming Cutler James R (Nov 19)
- Re: Introducing draft-denog-v6ops-addresspartnaming Scott Morris (Nov 22)