On 1/16/12 8:46 AM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
> On 1/11/12 10:34 AM, Linus Nordberg wrote:
>> Alex Le Heux wrote
>> Wed, 11 Jan 2012 09:57:00 +0100:
>>
>> | > RFC 3849 defines the prefix 2001:DB8::/32 as being reserved for
>> | > documentation. That should be fine for this.
>> |
>> | The documentat
On 1/11/12 10:34 AM, Linus Nordberg wrote:
> Alex Le Heux wrote
> Wed, 11 Jan 2012 09:57:00 +0100:
>
> | > RFC 3849 defines the prefix 2001:DB8::/32 as being reserved for
> | > documentation. That should be fine for this.
> |
> | The documentation prefix is for just that, use in documentation :
Alex Le Heux wrote
Wed, 11 Jan 2012 09:57:00 +0100:
| > RFC 3849 defines the prefix 2001:DB8::/32 as being reserved for
| > documentation. That should be fine for this.
|
| The documentation prefix is for just that, use in documentation :)
|
| ULA (RFC4193) is actually closer to the 10/8 (RFC1
Hi,
On Jan 10, 2012, at 22:36, Linus Nordberg wrote:
> Karsten Loesing wrote
> Tue, 10 Jan 2012 14:45:03 +0100:
>
> | - Write 3 bytes of the sanitized IPv6 address in [::] notation. We're
> | writing sanitized IPv4 addresses as 10.x.x.x. Is there a counterpart
> | for IPv6 addresses? It shou
Karsten Loesing wrote
Tue, 10 Jan 2012 14:45:03 +0100:
| - Write 3 bytes of the sanitized IPv6 address in [::] notation. We're
| writing sanitized IPv4 addresses as 10.x.x.x. Is there a counterpart
| for IPv6 addresses? It should be obvious that these are "private"
| addresses, but I'd like to
Hi Linus, Ian, list,
now that we have bridges running on IPv6 addresses, some bridge
operators enabled that feature on their public bridges and published
descriptors to the bridge authority.
I wonder how to sanitize these addresses for metrics data. (Currently,
lines containing IPv6 addresses ar
