9 Sep
1997
9 Sep
'97
6:34 p.m.
In article <199709092102.RAA18271@Iodine.Mlink.NET>, Phillip Vandry <vandry@Mlink.NET> wrote:
Maybe that should be even more the standard practice. There is nothing to lose in allocating in the order .0, .128, .64, .192, .32, .96, .160, .224 instead of .0, .32, .64, .96, .128, .160, .192, .224.
Sounds similar to what was suggested in RFC 1219 over six years ago. -- Shields, CrossLink.