Have you heard the legend of the Black Dac? It is seen on rare occasions in remote parts of Australia, travelling more or less at tree top level in places where you could reasonable expect not to be seen at all.
I'm afraid I haven't. Are you the one flying it?;-) I have seen one going very low over where I live (Sweden), though. What's a "dac", btw?
I think you are taking the car analogy to far. Going strictly with the highway metaphor throughout the article, you risk loosing readers who don't get the reference to the Internet backbone... oh... Waitaminute! You didn't really mean... did you?
I feel with you, I too am tired of such crappy web pages. What are they trying to achieve?! I went through pretty much the same steps as you did, however it didwork in my Firefox. For extra lack of credibility, they do the layout, not with CSS, not even with tables, but with frames (!), and the list is not in a single page, no, you have to navigate between the different people with some more javascript. So much for the HTML elements "unordered list" and "list item". *crying*
This complicates the IP packet header, and makes it a non constant size
Yes, of course it's of non-constant size. It will never be extendable if it requres a fixed size.
this is one application where every ms counts
For reasonably sized addresses (say, less than 100 bits) I cannot imagine that it would add anything close to a whole millisecond to the processing of that address. I would rather set the tolerance level (for the time it takes to decode an address) much lower, actually.
this means that one sure way to really break naive implementations of various services would be create a network with ridiculously long addresses
Oh, that would be a really _broken_ implementation. No less broken than your text editor would be if it only allowed you to write texts of fixed length!
Dotted-quad notation of IP addresses is for human consumption only. Networking equipment treats them as 32-bit values. Or maybe it's four 8-bit values - I forget, and I'm too lazy to look it up. The point is, it's not a string at the network stack level, so simply appending another number isn't possible.
I am suggesting a _new_ way here, not that we all suddenly append more digits to existing addresses and continue to call it IPv4.
As for "32-bit value" vs. "four 8-bit values", I must say I wouldn't see the difference. For instance, of which type is this one: 01101001001001101010101110000010
How about having a scheme like the following: If I have, say, the single address 111.222.333.444 (it's not a valid IP address, I know), and have more than one thing I want to plug in, I just append another dot and create a new sublevel. I get 111.222.333.444.1, 111.222.333.444.2, etc. There is no limit to it.
The downside I can think of is that it will probably be slightly more work (and thus slower) for the machines on the net that reads the address on packets to send them in the right direction (I believe they often do it in hardware). But I think it could be worth it, don't you?
I still don't get it! (and sorry for nagging about it, again) Is there a single Slashdotter here who clicks on ads? (assuming you haven't got them filtered (thank you, Firefox extensions)) I'm not sure I have even done it for experimental purposes. I _never_ do it. Not the flashy ones, not the discreet text ones. Why would anyone do it? If you're looking for something, you go get it. If not, you don't want anyone telling you to go get it. Gah, giving up control of yourself like that!
So spot on, judging from this text only, it seems that I agree with all they say! (hmm, which is the definition of "good", right?) If I were American, I'd vote for them. But wait, I'm Swedish!
It is only a matter of time until such an incident breaks out on a plane
I say that it wouldn't cause much harm to the flight unless it happened just next to the pilots or something. It _shouldn't_ cause much harm to the flight! Just a small fire, easy to put out, that's all. Imagine a large passenger flying machine, where this happens in the cabin. The pilots would probably not even notice until informed by the cabin crew afterwards. (Especially not nowadays with locked doors due to all the tourism.. sorry, terrorism paranoia.)
Slashdot Mirror
Call it something with "entierprise".
They have bought NeXT?
I think you are taking the car analogy to far. Going strictly with the highway metaphor throughout the article, you risk loosing readers who don't get the reference to the Internet backbone... oh... Waitaminute! You didn't really mean... did you?
I feel with you, I too am tired of such crappy web pages. What are they trying to achieve?! I went through pretty much the same steps as you did, however it did work in my Firefox. For extra lack of credibility, they do the layout, not with CSS, not even with tables, but with frames (!), and the list is not in a single page, no, you have to navigate between the different people with some more javascript. So much for the HTML elements "unordered list" and "list item". *crying*
Look, people! Here's one that does read the article without reading the blurb. In one word -- wow.
Do you have any examples of non-proprietary hardware? It would be interesting to check out.
I am suggesting a _new_ way here, not that we all suddenly append more digits to existing addresses and continue to call it IPv4.
As for "32-bit value" vs. "four 8-bit values", I must say I wouldn't see the difference. For instance, of which type is this one: 01101001001001101010101110000010
Next update of Windows will prevent it (the browser) from running. No worries.
It's the new, boosted, PATRIOT Act: Intellectual Property version 6
How about having a scheme like the following: If I have, say, the single address 111.222.333.444 (it's not a valid IP address, I know), and have more than one thing I want to plug in, I just append another dot and create a new sublevel. I get 111.222.333.444.1, 111.222.333.444.2, etc. There is no limit to it.
The downside I can think of is that it will probably be slightly more work (and thus slower) for the machines on the net that reads the address on packets to send them in the right direction (I believe they often do it in hardware). But I think it could be worth it, don't you?
How does NoScript enter the picture when it comes to blocking ads?
I still don't get it! (and sorry for nagging about it, again) Is there a single Slashdotter here who clicks on ads? (assuming you haven't got them filtered (thank you, Firefox extensions)) I'm not sure I have even done it for experimental purposes. I _never_ do it. Not the flashy ones, not the discreet text ones. Why would anyone do it? If you're looking for something, you go get it. If not, you don't want anyone telling you to go get it. Gah, giving up control of yourself like that!
So spot on, judging from this text only, it seems that I agree with all they say! (hmm, which is the definition of "good", right?) If I were American, I'd vote for them. But wait, I'm Swedish!
...which means my computer isn't powerful enough to play them. :-/ (Like I ever would get a computer.. eh..?)
I also wonder, why isn't Apple or Microsoft in?