The Mathematical Reality of IP Addressin in IPv4...

This looks like interesting (and operational) reading.

----- Forwarded message from Internet-Drafts@ietf.org -----

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.

  Title : The Mathematical Reality of IP Addressing in IPv4
                          Questions the need for Another IP System
                          of Addressing
  Author(s) : E. Terrell
  Filename : draft-terrell-math-ipaddr-ipv4-00.txt
  Pages : 22
  
This paper was necessitated by an overwhelming desire; an attempt to
end the apparent disparity in the dissemination of information absent
of the logical and thoroughness in rendering an explanation of the IP
Addressing Scheme. To render a more pointed fact, I needed to pass a
CISCO Certification Examination. However, this can never be
accomplished, if the information that is needed and used in the
preparation thereof, lacks continuity and propagates errors pertaining
to foundational information. Needless to say, my endeavors were not in
vein. That is,as a direct result of this undertaking, I corrected the
underlining errors, derived a possible alternative approach to the
IPv4 Addressing Scheme, and expanded its Class system ( that is no
longer in use ). In other words, I was indeed successful in the
elimination of the problems associated with IP Address Flooding
inherent in IPv4 and the complexities of IPv6. In short, small
business and single family dwellings can now have the option of
having their own private IP Addressing Scheme, without the disparity
resulting from the steep learning curve presented in IPv6. While the
Internet Community at large, will not suffer a shortage of the
availability IP Addresses for assigned distribution. Especially since,
while the number available IP Addresses do not exceed the amount
reported to be provided, if IPv6 is implemented. It does indeed,
provide enough IP Addresses to cover their continued issuance for at
least another 100 years or so. Which is dependent upon the adoption
of an adequate scheme for its allocation and distribution.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-terrell-math-ipaddr-ipv4-00.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
  "get draft-terrell-math-ipaddr-ipv4-00.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
  mailserv@ietf.org.
In the body type:
  "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-terrell-math-ipaddr-ipv4-00.txt".
  
NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
  MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this
  feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
  command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
  a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers
  exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
  "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
  up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
  how to manipulate these messages.
    
Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

----- End forwarded message -----

---------========== J.D. Falk <jdfalk@cybernothing.org> =========---------
  > "The Ogre philosopher Gnerdel beleived the purpose of life |
  > was to live as high on the food chain as possible. |
  > She refused to eat vegetarians, and preferred to live entirely |
  > on creatures that preyed on sentient beings." |
  > -Magic: The Gathering "Grey Ogre" |
----========== http://www.cybernothing.org/jdfalk/home.html ==========----

Be sure and read the end as well....

References

1. E. Terrell ( not published notarized, 1979 ) " The Proof of
    Fermat's Last Theorem: The Revolution in Mathematical Thought "

-scott

This looks like interesting (and operational) reading.

----- Forwarded message from Internet-Drafts@ietf.org -----

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts

directories.

SUMMARY of
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-terrell-math-ipaddr-ipv4-00.txt

By distinguishing apparently identical IP addresses by using different
subnet masks one can increase the number of IP addresses distinguishable by
a 32-bit number to greater than 2^32.

Except for the problem that you need 32 extra bits to carry a mask or 5
extra bits to carry the masklen.

IETF should have waited until 2000/04/01 before posting this.

SUMMARY of
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-terrell-math-ipaddr-ipv4-00.txt

By distinguishing apparently identical IP addresses by using different
subnet masks one can increase the number of IP addresses distinguishable by
a 32-bit number to greater than 2^32.

yeah, then you'll need a minor adjustment to the routing table size when
corporations and providers want to change networks or multihome.

Except for the problem that you need 32 extra bits to carry a mask or 5
extra bits to carry the masklen.

nice try, next topic please.

-craig

Sean, here's an answer to your question about affects of GPS rollover.

Obviously, it's screwed up this person's clocks enough to think that
this is April 1st.

-dorian

SUMMARY of
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-terrell-math-ipaddr-ipv4-00.txt

By distinguishing apparently identical IP addresses by using different
subnet masks one can increase the number of IP addresses distinguishable by
a 32-bit number to greater than 2^32.

No doubt. But... the IP packet have not _netmask_ field, and TCP/IP
socket have not too. If you add this, it's easier to add extra address
bits.

On the other hand, I can send the draft too -:). If we add 'PORT RANGE'
field to the 'PTR' DNS record, and some trick to the 'xx.xx.xx.xx'
address notation, we can split one IP address to the 4 - 8 hosts by
allocating the different port ranges for every one. And it do not need to
rewrite TCP stack and routers at all, only a little part in DNS and
service resolver, or in the 'connect' and 'bind' function (and can be
realised by the NAT just now. -:). There is not too big problem to
increase IPv4 address space twise (cook one bit from the port field, and
that's all).

Through I wonder why people are making so many noice aroung unexisting
IPv6 and don't try to improve existing systems a little... IPv4 have a
few opportunities to create milti-level address hierarchy:
- source routing
- port/address mapping
- netmask and AS numbers (for the routing only).

Through after SNMP, MLPS etc I wonder to nothing...

Except for the problem that you need 32 extra bits to carry a mask or 5
extra bits to carry the masklen.

IETF should have waited until 2000/04/01 before posting this.

----------------------------------------------------------
Mike Bird Tel: 209-742-5000 FAX: 209-966-3117
President POP: 209-742-5156 PGR: 209-742-9979
Iron Mtn Systems http://member.yosemite.net/

Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow
(+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 230-41-41, N 13729 (pager)
(+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)