> From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi....@nanog.org Fri Jan 20 08:11:24 > 2012 > Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 08:07:10 -0600 > From: -Hammer- <bhmc...@gmail.com> > To: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: US DOJ victim letter > > On a less serious note, did anyone notice the numbers on the fbi.gov > link? I'm pretty sure they are implying those are IP addresses. > 123.456.789 and 987.654.321. Must be the same folks that do the Nexus > documentation for Cisco. > For illustration purposes, for a non-techincal audience, it seems (at least somewhat) reasonable to use 'nonets' instead of octets. After all, 'no nets' are clearly not what DNS -should- be returning. *GRIN*
And, of course, systems using the traditional unix dotted-quad to binary conversion logic _will_ happily convert those strings to a 32-bit int.
