going-flying.com gemini git repository
2f6854bffb298d951701f9385ce490ef86fcb2be - Matthew Ernisse - 1599003858
point the RFCs in my ipv6 cloud post to my passthrough cgi
diff --git a/users/mernisse/articles/10.gmi b/users/mernisse/articles/10.gmi index f86c5d2..4c3eed6 100644 --- a/users/mernisse/articles/10.gmi +++ b/users/mernisse/articles/10.gmi @@ -12,9 +12,9 @@ more flexible assignment of addresses in 1993. Two years later in 1995 RFC 1883 brought about the next version of IP, known generally as IPv6. One of the key changes of IPv6 is the use of 128 bits to specify addresses. -=> https://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc791.txt -=> https://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1519.txt -=> https://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1883.txt +=> /cgi-bin/rfc/rfc791.txt +=> /cgi-bin/rfc/rfc1519.txt +=> /cgi-bin/rfc/rfc1883.txt ### Addressing @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ of assignable addresses is so large it is hard to fathom. Written out for internal networking operations it represents a significant increase in available addresses. -=> https://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1918.txt +=> /cgi-bin/rfc/rfc1918.txt => https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2%5E128 ## The Cloud @@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ to the Inetneret. (I have somewhat fond memories of using NAT (known at the time in Linux as IP Masquerade) to share a single dial-up connection to the Internet with two computers (one was mine and the other used by my siblings)). -=> https://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1631.txt +=> /cgi-bin/rfc/rfc1631.txt The drawback of NAT is that the systems that lack the public IP address cannot receive an incoming connection. There is a facility to expose @@ -108,8 +108,8 @@ as it allowed you to be uniquely identified literally anywhere in the world by IP alone. Most modern IPv6 stacks implement RFC 3040 or 4941) which provides them with something like 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 possible addresses to use. -=> https://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3040.txt -=> https://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4941.txt +=> /cgi-bin/rfc/rfc3040.txt +=> /cgi-bin/rfc/rfc4941.txt ## What does this have to do with the cloud?