IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Sat, 15 June 2019 18:34 UTC

Return-Path: <sander@steffann.nl>
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 52B7B120088 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 11:34:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=steffann.nl
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 BXZX9zcK4MhF for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 11:34:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [IPv6:2001:9e0:803::6]) (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 8A84A120019 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 11:34:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id B708E49; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 20:34:30 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=steffann.nl; h= references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:date:date :in-reply-to:x-mailer:from:from:subject:subject:mime-version :content-type:content-type:received:received; s=mail; t= 1560623667; bh=oN2AKbOIBE6eQfD4wtDy0xxMwis1WKGM74fhQGNMg4Y=; b=f OM0BFHu8PeHKyffgS3aGHXC+BXCoQ/J46gwr/H0ir6l+UHNGqkjtH+0g3Ubji4no gEtQ8wAamYlRSNrCdH+qsKLkKNNAy2CZttD+RJCkxUAJ7pDtU5NWIioWOJ40S5yk 7/RlYdSewnM/7c+T5xMxTtGJHLjMLKDyCfxwWHV2pc=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl
Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id Crs7zwG4uO_N; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 20:34:27 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:1d23:1d7b:25c:5e72] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:1d23:1d7b:25c:5e72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9EFC13C; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 20:34:25 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: Is 1111 1110 10 equal to 0xfe80 or 0x3fa?
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16F203)
In-Reply-To: <CAHw9_i+66gpOO+MyWcah5_OTeWZ75LhYd2jT4OF5vf3PWbBosw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2019 20:34:24 +0200
Cc: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>, IPv6 <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <05CB8932-5A2C-4B0B-9973-34DEBE676D91@steffann.nl>
References: <a71b00b7-0e0c-242a-b3f7-147f4c6b2eb0@gmail.com> <D05C857F-42F6-4F17-8520-A0BF4C8FB775@steffann.nl> <CAHw9_i+U90wczYJ9RwBnzqCd09qfjoPBhNv5sH_wRHfJ9RkGjQ@mail.gmail.com> <e0d8f4a9-848e-ff8f-0031-ed8afa100560@gmail.com> <CAHw9_iLmfv0zJEwn_0yHo5wi9Bj+S5huXzQ3DxvnXmDGMHcnFg@mail.gmail.com> <CAHw9_i+66gpOO+MyWcah5_OTeWZ75LhYd2jT4OF5vf3PWbBosw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/ri48kgiMXmiGeUfSvphCWrXrRHc>
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: Sat, 15 Jun 2019 18:34:35 -0000

Hi Warren,

> Apologize - I lost my cool, accusing someone of trolling is not OK; I
> apologize, it was wrong of me.

Considering the contents and persistence of this discussion I don't blame you. I had the same thoughts...

Alexandre has been a long term participant, but making a problem of prefix notation that is unambiguous and well understood is currently very bad for the SNR on this list.

In short: I'm happy that someone spoke up. Maybe calling it trolling isn't the right way, but I've had enough of this thread...

Cheers,
Sander

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email