Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!CS.WISC.EDU!hagens
From: hagens@CS.WISC.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.dev-environ
Subject: Re: Encoding RFC 1006 addresses in X.500
Message-ID: <9001171740.AA18406@janeb.cs.wisc.edu>
Date: 17 Jan 90 17:40:52 GMT
References: <1371.632395166@UK.AC.UCL.CS>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Distribution: inet
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 13


> An important aspect is to choose addresses which will not confuse conformant
> OSI implementations, which do not know about all of the grody stuff you are
> doing here.   (Rob's proposal falls here).   

If your system can make a routing decision based upon a variable length
address prefix, then it is no harder to recognize 54.... as special-kludge-o-rama
than to recognize 470005000002.... as special-kludge-o-rama.

If your system can't make a routing decision based upon a variable length
address prefix, then wait for Berkeley's 4.4 distribution and copy their code.

rob