[157011] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv4 address length technical design
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Kevin Broderick)
Wed Oct 3 12:34:49 2012
In-Reply-To: <CABSLv--2C_Y8XR4NJ21kbg8vv1E4Pkmhg=rZHEUxvS-YEP5p=w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Kevin Broderick <kbroder@accretive-networks.net>
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 09:33:25 -0700
To: Chris Campbell <chris@ctcampbell.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I'll add that in the mid-90's, in a University Of Washington lecture hall, =
Vint Cerf expressed some regret over going with 32 bits. Chuckle worthy an=
d at the time, and a fond memory
- K
Sadiq Saif <sadiq@asininetech.com> w=
rote:
>On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Chris Campbell <chris@ctcampbell.c=
om>
>wrote:
>> Is anyone aware of any historical documentation relating to =
the
>choice of 32 bits for an IPv4 address?
>>
>> Cheers.
>
>I believe the =
relevant RFC is RFC 791 -
>https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc791
>
>--
>Sadiq=
S
>O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org
