[148980] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: using ULA for 'hidden' v6 devices?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Thu Jan 26 22:58:14 2012
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:47:15 PST."
<7DC30DBC-AC6B-4B70-B65B-3999850B50BD@delong.com>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 22:55:02 -0500
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1327636502_6462P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:47:15 PST, Owen DeLong said:
> Where the definition of (efficient) is highly flexible and almost
> certainly does not refer to bit conservation.
There's a reason we put 128 bits in there. :)
--==_Exmh_1327636502_6462P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001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=qtq0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1327636502_6462P--
