[157019] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: IPv4 address length technical design
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tony Patti)
Wed Oct 3 15:45:03 2012
From: "Tony Patti" <tony@swalter.com>
To: "'George Herbert'" <george.herbert@gmail.com>,
"'Tony Hain'" <alh-ietf@tndh.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAK__KzsAKEKoJOrBDJwpWGT21MWs8f5Km-PS2qF13Tjk+LtpWw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 15:44:16 -0400
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Perhaps worth noting (for the archives) that a significant part of the early
ARPAnet was DECsystem-10's with 36-bit words.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDP-10
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email
Tony Patti
CIO
S. Walter Packaging Corp.
-----Original Message-----
From: George Herbert [mailto:george.herbert@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 3:28 PM
To: Tony Hain
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: IPv4 address length technical design
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Tony Hain <alh-ietf@tndh.net> wrote:
It's worthwhile noting that the state of system (mini and
microcomputer) art at the time of the 1977 discussions was, for example, the
Intel 8085 (8-bit registers; the 16-bit 8086 was 1978) and 16-bit PDP-11s.
The 32-bit VAX 11/780 postdated these (announced October 77).
Yes, you can do 32 or 64 bit network addressing with smaller registers, but
there are tendencies to not think that way.
