IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Is 1111 1110 10 equal to 0xfe80 or 0x3fa?

Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Fri, 07 June 2019 05:50 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA2F9120164 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Jun 2019 22:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.632
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.632 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NjLAVztQRTrT for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Jun 2019 22:50:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.228]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85DB812015E for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Jun 2019 22:50:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id x575oFfK020524; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 07:50:15 +0200
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 169E320118E; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 07:50:15 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.13]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07C2D200956; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 07:50:15 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [10.8.68.40] ([10.8.68.40]) by muguet2-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id x575oEZM028406; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 07:50:14 +0200
Subject: Re: Is 1111 1110 10 equal to 0xfe80 or 0x3fa?
To: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: IPv6 <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <a71b00b7-0e0c-242a-b3f7-147f4c6b2eb0@gmail.com> <63DC2EEC-C456-4090-9242-6675F47B6351@gmail.com>
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b71b9dfb-cd1e-b5cf-f0bf-885d479f6d29@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2019 07:50:14 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <63DC2EEC-C456-4090-9242-6675F47B6351@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/BrrPn-Dd8YO6zM0PR154kXNgFSI>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2019 05:50:20 -0000


Le 06/06/2019 à 23:41, Fred Baker a écrit :
> 
> 
>> On Jun 6, 2019, at 10:18 AM, Alexandre Petrescu
>> <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I maintain that 1111 1110 10 equals 0x3fa, because that's what my
>> Windows Calculator says: I type 1111 1110 10 and it converts to
>> 0x3fa.
> 
> You're correct if those are the only bits. However, in 1111 1110 10
> you have to also include 00 0000, because it's a /10 prefix.

?

1111 1110 10 are 10 bits and they are the only bits.

I would indeed add the 00 0000 if they were 16bits, and then I would 
write fe80::/16.

But, since a few people say differently, I think I will need to look at 
it deeper.  MAybe it is just a matter of language expression.

Alex

  It's
> fe80::/10, not ten bits of information with the least significant bit
> in the "ones" location. 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 
The fact that there is a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven is an 
interesting comment on projected traffic volume...
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email