Subject: Re: name service (does anyone else see this?)
To: None <email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Olaf Seibert <email@example.com>
Date: 08/07/1995 03:36:17
John Hawkinson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > From: email@example.com (Greg A. Woods)
> > To: John Hawkinson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > Cc: email@example.com (Michael K. Sanders),
> > mouse@Collatz.McRCIM.McGill.EDU, current-users@NetBSD.ORG
> > > You should certainly use the loopback address in preference to
> > > 0.0.0.0, which is entirely bogus. If any implementation accepts it,
> > > it's confused itself.
I seem to recall from the IP spec that network all-bits-zero means
"this network, even though I don't know its number (yet)", and the host
part all-bits-zero means "this host, even though I don't know its
number (yet)". So it's reasonable for the address 0.0.0.0 to be the
Have you indecently fucked this Exon idiot and his allies today?
___ Copyright 1995 Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert. All Rights Reserved.
\X/ You are not allowed to read this using any kind of Micro$oft product.