nanog mailing list archives
RE: network name 101100010100110.net
From: Tony Finch <dot () dotat at>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 15:22:45 +0100
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
I'm assuming we aren't making jokes here, but 3com.com was created in 1986:I'm confused. 3com.com would not appear to be entirely numerical. Or maybe someone spiked my coffee this morning.
Once leading digits became permitted, the syntax was relaxed to allow all-numeric labels. See RFC 1123. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <dot () dotat at> http://dotat.at/ HUMBER THAMES DOVER WIGHT PORTLAND: NORTH BACKING WEST OR NORTHWEST, 5 TO 7, DECREASING 4 OR 5, OCCASIONALLY 6 LATER IN HUMBER AND THAMES. MODERATE OR ROUGH. RAIN THEN FAIR. GOOD.
Current thread:
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net, (continued)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Joel Jaeggli (Oct 17)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Joe Hamelin (Oct 18)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Barry Shein (Oct 18)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Tony Finch (Oct 18)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Steve Atkins (Oct 17)
- Message not available
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Roland Perry (Oct 19)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net David Shaw (Oct 19)
- RE: network name 101100010100110.net Deepak Jain (Oct 19)
- RE: network name 101100010100110.net Nathan Eisenberg (Oct 19)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net bmanning (Oct 19)
- RE: network name 101100010100110.net Tony Finch (Oct 20)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Roland Perry (Oct 19)