search for: ipv8

...erators (like TG) for the same, but I want to do application performance analysis for different applications. Is there another alternative with which I can know and generate traffic similar to different applications? Thanks and regards, Sudeep On Thu, 23 Sep 2004, Steven Berson wrote: > IPv8 is already taken - see RFC 1621. > > Cheers, > Steve > > David G. Andersen wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 11:01:23AM -0700, Joe Touch scribed: >> >>> PS - if you''re going to pick some bits to modify that existing routers >>> might a...

...store up to 43 bits of addressing (4+7=11+32=43) 5. The AM/FM InterNAT bit in the IPv4 Header can also be used to differentiate Next Generation higher-quality services... ...Asterisk is a natural extension of the NAT transition/evolution and helps to negate any need for IPv6... Jim Fleming http://IPv8.no-ip.com [1]========================================================== ----- Original Message ----- From: "John L Crain" <crain at iana.org> To: <sanog at sanog.org> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 5:00 PM Subject: IPv4 Addresses update > > Dear Colleagues, >...

...the Linux man page are > > unequivocal about the _only_ use of that flag being to special case > > a NULL address (meaning 'this machine') to return either the wildcard > > address or the LOOPBACK address. > > I had in mind that at some point in the future (say with ipv8 or > 802.11t-2042) the flag might mean more. ... That would seem to be a pretty good summation of how we're failing to converge here ... Brainstorming imaginary problems to fit your proposed solution, especially when you don't clearly say exactly what *your real* use case was here, d...

...y"? Both SuSv4 and the Linux man page are > unequivocal about the _only_ use of that flag being to special case > a NULL address (meaning 'this machine') to return either the wildcard > address or the LOOPBACK address. I had in mind that at some point in the future (say with ipv8 or 802.11t-2042) the flag might mean more. I'd say the intension is to use AI_PASSIVE if you plan to listen on this address, so it seemed right to use it. But I'm willing to restrict the discussion to the removing of AI_ADDRCONFIG. > > > Using AI_CANONNAME here should be harmless...

Hello Ron, On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 04:08:49PM +1030, Ron via Syslinux wrote: > On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 12:09:43PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote: > > AI_CANONNAME is only relevant when the resulting official name is used, > > which is not the case in tftpd for the address to bind to. Also > > AI_ADDRCONFIG isn't helpful. This flag is good for sockets used to > >