ETT-R&D Publications E. Terrell
IT Professional, Author / Researcher April 2002
Internet Draft
Category: Proposed Standard
Document: draft-terrell-internet-protocol-t1-t2-ad-sp-00.txt
Expires October 15, 2002
INTERNET PROTOCOL t1 and t2 ADDRESS SPACE
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft, and is in full conformance
with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts
are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a
maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or
obsolete by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to
use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other
than as "work in progress". The list of current Internet-Drafts
can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed
at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
Conventions
Please note, the font size for the Tables are smaller than the
expected 12 pts. However, if you are using the most current
Web Browser, the View Section of the Title bar provides you
with the option to either increase or decrease the font size for
comfort level of viewing. That is, provided that this is the
HTML or PDF version.
E Terrell [Page 1]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract
Introduction: Analysis and Impact of the IPv4 Internet Protocol
Address Space, which Questions the Current Use and
Application of the 'CIDR Notation'
Chapter I: Analysis IPv4, IPv6, IPt1, and IPt2 address space using
the HD-Ratio
Chapter II: Suggestion for the IPt1 and IPt2 Internet Protocol
Address Space, Supernetting and the New 'CIDR' Notation
Chapter III: IPt1 and IPt2; The APRA and IN-ADD.APRA Addresses
Chapter IV: Security
References
E Terrell [Page 2]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Abstract
This paper provides a visualization of the lack of IP Address Control,
a Blunder, which may be excused partly because of the impossibility of
Predicting the Current, as well as the Future use and growth of the
Internet. Furthermore, this investigation also attempts a Critical
Analysis of Current use of the HD-Ratio in the IPv4 and IPv6 IP
Specifications. Moreover, while the IPv4 and IPv6 specifications are
indeed the primary focus. To provide a fair comparison however, requires,
if not mandates, the uses of the IPt1 and IPt2 IP Protocol Specifications
in this Analysis as well. The reasoning here nevertheless, is the
difference in the respective Addressing Schematics, the understanding
of which could provide a greater insight into possible Errors in Logical
Reasoning, and in the Judgment that was used when trying to develop the
appropriate IP Addressing Specification. That is, when it is understood
that the primary focuses of the former renders a greater significance to
the HOST IP Address assignment, while the focus of the latter emphasizes
only the Network IP Address. This in turn should, as it shall be concluded,
makes all the difference (Big Difference!) when trying to determine their
respective Efficiencies, which would be discerned as the Total Number of
Nodes that can be attached to Service the Global Networking Community.
Moreover, it is essential to note, the IPt1 and the IPt2 IP Protocol
Specifications, exceeds the Requirements outlined as the Mandate
for any new IP Addressing System, as was specified in RFC1550.
"This work is Dedicated to my first and only child, 'Yahnay', who is;
the Mover of Dreams, the Maker of Reality, and the 'Princess of the
New Universe'. (E.T.)"
E Terrell [Page 3]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Introduction: Analysis and Impact of the IPv4 Internet Protocol
Address Space, which Questions the Current Use of
and Application of the 'CIDR Notation'
The mathematical learning curve regarding an understanding of such
concepts as 'Bit Mapping' the 'Network Portion of an IP Address' can
be long and arduous. And this is seen especially true, when trying to
grasp the 'How-To's' and functional purpose of 'CIDR'. And while, I
have read the works from only a few authors whose approach makes a
distinction, as would be a noted difference in the interpretation of
the definition of 'CIDR'. I have noted moreover, their approach is not
a pronounced separation, as would be an unquestionable distinction used
in the 'Water and Oil' analogy from Chemistry. However, the beginner,
would understand quite clearly the difference between the 'Front-End'
and 'Back-End' approaches used in "Supernetting of an IP Address".
Where by the 'Bit Mapping' of the 'Network Portion', would represent
the 'Front-End' approach, and the 'Bit Mapping' of the 'Host Portion'
would represent the 'Back-End' approach, in what is defined, or called
the "Supernetting of an IP Address", or 'CIDR'. Nevertheless, while the
mathematical operation involved in either the 'Front-End' or 'Back-End'
usage of æCIDRÆ is not, by themselves, confusing or conflicting
operations. Still, a lot remains the Wishful Dream, or on the 'Wish List'
of the hopeful, regarding a greater Specificity in the definition and
distinction of the functional 'Parameters' associated with the conventions
used in the 'CIDR' notation representing a Network IP Address. Needless
to say, this becomes even more evident when trying to understand the
"INTERNET PROTOCOL V4 ADDRESS SPACE", which was developed and used by
IANA as a guide, or scheme, Denoting some Method used to determine IP
Address Availability, Special Assignment, and Allocation.
In other words, TABLE 1, the "IPv4 Internet Protocol Address Space",
according to the current standards and definition of 'CIDR', one would
conclude that there is a great number of IP Addresses wasted on HOST
Assignments. And this is apparent from the 'Bit Map' definition assigned
to the notation "/8". Where in any 32 Bit IP Addressing format, this
'Bit Mapping' notation accounts for (Class A = 126 x 254^3) 2,064,770,064
IP Addresses under the current IPv4 specification, that is, without using
the 'Front-End' indicator from Class A. And then, when it is used, it
would it would account, (again using the current definitions of 'CIDR')
an assignment, or allocation of more than 16 Million IP Address
(1 X 245^3). Which, to say the very least, amounts to IP Address waste,
because this has the effect of providing a Host with Network Status. 'Not
to mention that most of the companies, who has such an arrangement are
not "IPS's".
E Terrell [Page 4]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Nevertheless, the Mathematical Problem(s) encompassing these definitions
far out weight the problems associated with IP Address Waste. In other
words, the Current Methods and Definitions of 'CIDR', regarding it use
in 'Bit Mapping' an IP Address, is Mathematically Incorrect. Or just
plain Wrong! In other words, an '8 Bit Mapping' Designation under the
Current '32 Bit IP Specification', can only account for '255' IP
Addresses (And NO more than that!). To be more specific however, what
this means Mathematically, is that, there is only '1' of the '4' '8 Bit
Quadrants' being used, which sets the Parameters for the Total Number of
IP Addresses Assigned. Moreover, the use of only '1' Quadrant, as a means
for specification, regarding the total number of IP Addresses assigned, is
an Error, which can not be used to Account for the 'Diversity in Number',
regarding the Total Number Combinations Derived from the Calculation of
the Total Number of IP Addresses Contained in the IP Address Class.
Unfortunately however, the above argument leads to a mathematical Proof,
which revives an Old Argument regarding the Method of Enumeration using
the Binary Numbering System. In other words, the Total, or Inclusive
Count, which would represent the '8 Bit Mapping' notation, '/8', would
not yield the Binary Number '255'. It would in fact represent '256',
because Zero, under the Current Binary Specification, is indeed a Binary
Number (0000). Furthermore, it should be understood, that this does serve
not only the explanation for the ongoing argument, but the Current
Definition of the Modern Binary System as well. Which is to say, under
the Current, or Modern Binary System, {11111111} = '8 Bits' = '255', does
not follow from the Definition of '2', representing Base, in what is
clearly (And has been Defined as Being) an Exponential, represented by
the equation, 2^N (Where N = some Positive Integer). In which case, the
the Total, or Inclusive Count for an '8 Bit' translation of a Binary
Number representing an Integer, would be given by the equation,
'2^8 = 256'. This moreover, Mathematically implies the equation,
8^32 = 256^4, which would be interpreted as meaning; 'There are '32'
Bits used to represent the '4,294,967,296' Integers, which represents
the Total Number of IP Addresses contained in the IPv4 Addressing
Specification. Nevertheless, while the counting methods used in the
Binary System remain in Dispute, an adequate representation for the 'CIDR'
Notation can be determined using the Current Binary Methods for
Enumeration. That is, given by TABLE 2, we have:
E Terrell [Page 5]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
TABLE 1
IPv4 Internet Protocol Address Space
Address Block Registry - Purpose Date
--------------- --------------------------------------- ------
000/8 IANA - Reserved Sep 81
001/8 IANA - Reserved Sep 81
002/8 IANA - Reserved Sep 81
003/8 General Electric Company May 94
004/8 Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc. Dec 92
005/8 IANA - Reserved Jul 95
006/8 Army Information Systems Center Feb 94
007/8 IANA - Reserved Apr 95
008/8 Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc. Dec 92
009/8 IBM Aug 92
010/8 IANA - Private Use Jun 95
011/8 DoD Intel Information Systems May 93
012/8 AT&T Bell Laboratories Jun 95
013/8 Xerox Corporation Sep 91
014/8 IANA - Public Data Network Jun 91
015/8 Hewlett-Packard Company Jul 94
016/8 Digital Equipment Corporation Nov 94
017/8 Apple Computer Inc. Jul 92
018/8 MIT Jan 94
019/8 Ford Motor Company May 95
020/8 Computer Sciences Corporation Oct 94
021/8 DDN-RVN Jul 91
022/8 Defense Information Systems Agency May 93
023/8 IANA - Reserved Jul 95
024/8 ARIN - Cable Block May 01
(Formerly IANA - Jul 95)
025/8 Royal Signals and Radar Establishment Jan 95
026/8 Defense Information Systems Agency May 95
027/8 IANA - Reserved Apr 95
028/8 DSI-North Jul 92
029/8 Defense Information Systems Agency Jul 91
030/8 Defense Information Systems Agency Jul 91
031/8 IANA - Reserved Apr 99
032/8 Norsk Informasjonsteknologi Jun 94
033/8 DLA Systems Automation Center Jan 91
034/8 Halliburton Company Mar 93
035/8 MERIT Computer Network Apr 94
036/8 IANA - Reserved Jul 00
(Formerly Stanford University - Apr 93)
E Terrell [Page 6]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
037/8 IANA - Reserved Apr 95
038/8 Performance Systems International Sep 94
039/8 IANA - Reserved Apr 95
040/8 Eli Lily and Company Jun 94
041/8 IANA - Reserved May 95
042/8 IANA - Reserved Jul 95
043/8 Japan Inet Jan 91
044/8 Amateur Radio Digital Communications Jul 92
045/8 Interop Show Network Jan 95
046/8 Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc. Dec 92
047/8 Bell-Northern Research Jan 91
048/8 Prudential Securities Inc. May 95
049/8 Joint Technical Command May 94
Returned to IANA Mar 98
050/8 Joint Technical Command May 94
Returned to IANA Mar 98
051/8 Deparment of Social Security of UK Aug 94
052/8 E.I. duPont de Nemours and Co., Inc. Dec 91
053/8 Cap Debis CCS Oct 93
054/8 Merck and Co., Inc. Mar 92
055/8 Boeing Computer Services Apr 95
056/8 U.S. Postal Service Jun 94
057/8 SITA May 95
058/8 IANA - Reserved Sep 81
059/8 IANA - Reserved Sep 81
060/8 IANA - Reserved Sep 81
061/8 APNIC - Pacific Rim Apr 97
062/8 RIPE NCC - Europe Apr 97
063/8 ARIN Apr 97
064/8 ARIN Jul 99
065/8 ARIN Jul 00
066/8 ARIN Jul 00
067/8 ARIN May 01
068/8 ARIN Jun 01
069-079/8 IANA - Reserved Sep 81
080/8 RIPE NCC Apr 01
081/8 RIPE NCC Apr 01
082-095/8 IANA - Reserved Sep 81
096-126/8 IANA - Reserved Sep 81
127/8 IANA - Reserved Sep 81
128-191/8 Various Registries May 93
E Terrell [Page 7]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
192/8 Various Registries - MultiRegional May 93
193/8 RIPE NCC - Europe May 93
194/8 RIPE NCC - Europe May 93
195/8 RIPE NCC - Europe May 93
196/8 Various Registries May 93
197/8 IANA - Reserved May 93
198/8 Various Registries May 93
199/8 ARIN - North America May 93
200/8 ARIN - Central and South America May 93
201/8 Reserved - Central and South America May 93
202/8 APNIC - Pacific Rim May 93
203/8 APNIC - Pacific Rim May 93
204/8 ARIN - North America Mar 94
205/8 ARIN - North America Mar 94
206/8 ARIN - North America Apr 95
207/8 ARIN - North America Nov 95
208/8 ARIN - North America Apr 96
209/8 ARIN - North America Jun 96
210/8 APNIC - Pacific Rim Jun 96
211/8 APNIC - Pacific Rim Jun 96
212/8 IPE NCC - Europe Oct 97
213/8 RIPE NCC - Europe Mar 99
214/8 US-DOD Mar 98
215/8 US-DOD Mar 98
216/8 ARIN - North America Apr 98
217/8 RIPE NCC - Europe Jun 00
218/8 APNIC - Pacific Rim Dec 00
219/8 APNIC Sep 01
220/8 APNIC Dec 01
221-223/8 IANA - Reserved Sep 81
224-239/8 IANA - Multicast Sep 81
240-255/8 IANA - Reserved Sep 81
E Terrell [Page 8]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
TABLE 2
IPv4 'Bit Mapped' IP Address Distribution
Derived from the Modern Method for Binary Enumeration
Using the 'CIDR' Notation
1 2 3 4
Network IP Address Number of IP Exponential Total
Class Range Addresses Issued equation Number of
/Starting /for the Octet yielding IP Addresses
Network Representing Total Number Issued
Prefix: the IP Address IP Addresses
Number of Bits Class Range Issued
| | | |
V V V V
"/New 'CIDR'
Notation"
CLASS A
0-126/00:8 = 0/8 = 2^0 = 1
0-126/00:8 = 1/8 = 2^1 = 2
0-126/00:8 = 2/8 = 2^2 = 4
| | |
V V V
0-126/00:8 = 6/8 = 2^6 = 64
| | |
V V V
0-126/00:8 = X/8 = 2^X = 126
-------------------------------------------------------
CLASS B
128-191/10:16 = 0/16 = 2^0 = 1
128-191/10:16 = 1/16 = 2^1 = 2
| | |
V V V
128-191/10:16 = X/16 = 2^X = 16,256
-------------------------------------------------------
E Terrell [Page 9]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
CLASS C
192-223/110:24 = 0/24 = 2^0 = 1
192-223/110:24 = 1/24 = 2^1 = 2
| | |
V V V
192-223/110:24 = X/24 = 2^X = 2,064,512
Nevertheless, while Table 2 provides a better description and use of the
'CIDR' notation, it falls extricably short from the full exploitation, and
the actual representation regarding the True Value of 'CIDR'. In other
words, the real Value for the use of 'CIDR', would be seen to take
advantage of the Total Number of IP Addresses contained in the IPv4
specification, and not just the limited number of IP Addresses contained
in 'Class C'. Where by, it should be very clear, that while Table 1 does
provide an easily discernable explanation of the IP Addresses Allocated.
Now. It also shows the IP Address waste, because it does nothing to change,
nor fix the Loss of more than 16 Million IP Addresses, for every IP Address
issued, which represents the Number IP Addresses wasted on HOST Address
assignment. Nonetheless, Re-Defining the CIDR' Notation as depicting the
'Network Prefix' and the 'Bit Range it Uses', as used in Table 2, under
column '1', does indeed provide the necessary foundation for its full
exploitation, and establishes a smooth Transition, which is represented
in the 'IPt1 IP Addressing Specification' (See Chapter II). Needless to
say, this method clearly follows from the definition of 'CIDR', and builds
upon the foundation, logically, that is has already established.
E Terrell [Page 10]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Chapter I: Analysis IPv4, IPv6, IPt1, and IPt2 address space using
the HD-Ratio
As shown in RFC1715, and RFC3194, the HD-ratio proved to be a Dismal
Failure for use as an indicator to determine IP Address use and
Distribution Efficiencies. In fact, it can easily be concluded that the
IPt1 and IPt2 IP Specification are the only Addressing Protocols which
meet the All of the Requirements outlined in RFC1550, especially since,
they were Logically Derived from the IPv4 IP Specification. In other
words, the IPt1 and IPt2 Protocol Specifications not only meet the
Transitional requirements, as would be viewed as meeting all of the
Engineering considerations required under RFC1550, but it also offers
a more Gradual, and yet Infinite Expansion Possibilities, to meet the
challenge that only the Colonization of the Universe could provide.
Needless to say, when examining the benefits of using the HD-Ratio, one
would discover, that is has absolutely No application regarding the
determination of the Efficiency Rating for the IPt1 and IPt2 Addressing
Protocol Specification, because these protocols makes use of more than
99.999+% of the IP Addresses contained in this Addressing System. And
while, some of the additional protocol definitions and specifications,
which increased the benefits of the IPv4 foundation, has been remarked,
or viewed as being unnecessary Growing Pains. These remarks should not be
considered as being anything but unintelligent babblings. As an example,
the use of 'CIDR', while not fully exploited, followed logically the
foundation of the IPv4 Specification, and paved the way for the
Mathematical and Logical derivation of a 2 New IP Addressing Systems,
which Completely exploited the Solid Foundation provided by the IPv4
Specification. In other words, at best, the HD-Ratio, like the H-Ratio,
is a Beguilement, whose only purpose is to deceive, because surely the
Logarithmic Equation described in RFC1715 could not serve any vital
purpose. In which case, the author would have been better off using the
elementary method for calculating the actual Efficiency Rating (see
Eq. 1). Because taking the Log to the Base 10, using this equation, would
not have derived any practical meaning, at least not one which could be
translated into some actuate determination for some Efficiency Rating
regarding the IP Addressing Systems. And this becomes even more apparent,
when it is realized that the Number of Bits used to represent an IP
Address does not account for the Total Number of IP Addresses available
in the IP Addressing System.
E Terrell [Page 11]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Eq. 1
log (number of objects)
H = -----------------------
available bits
Furthermore, while RFC3194 provides a more actuate Logarithmic Equation,
for Efficiency Determination, its usage would be more applicable in a
Current Use scenario (See Eq. 2). This becomes even more apparent when it
is realized that the 'Numerator' used in the equation is a 'Constant', and
not the result derived from some 'Sampling Related to a Statistical
Analyses of the World's Population Growth, or Decline Patterns.
Eq. 2
log(number of allocated objects)
HD = ------------------------------------------
log(maximum number of allocatable objects)
Even still, suppose for a moment that Eq. 2 were a valid representation
for the determination of the Efficient Rating for an IP Addressing System.
And suppose even further, that a test was needed to determine the value of
the IPt1 Addressing Specification, then the results from the Calculations
using this equation would be 'Startling', because the 'HD-Ratio' would
approach NEARLY a VALUE of '1'. This is because all of the available IP
Addresses, which are available in this IP Addressing Specification are
used for Network Assignment, the point of 'Demarcation', that excludes
the use of a viable Network IP Address for Host Address Assignment. And
if you would note Table 3, and the Currently Acceptable IP Network
Addressing Practices, then it would be realized, that the Entire World
could Actually be Networked using only Section 'A-1' from Class A of IPt1
IP Addressing Specification.
Furthermore, since the Prefixes used in the IPt2 IP Protocol Specification
can not be used in any calculation, which would be required for the
Determination of the Efficiency Rating regarding the use of the Total
Number of IP Address. Then their use within the IPt2 Protocol
Specification is indeed an Enhancement, which can only be viewed as a
Magnification Freebie. That is, without question, IPt2 allows a more
Gradual Growth that can quite easily be Expanded to Infinity (See Tables
4 and 5). In which case, Population Growth really does not matter, because
it is now a Variable that has been removed from the Equation.
E Terrell [Page 12]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Nevertheless, while there was some mention of a comparison to other
Addressing Systems, there was No mention regarding the way these Numbering
Systems were used or even Allocated (i.e. The telephony System). In other
words, their mention was pointless, because no clear foundation, that
could be viewed as having establish the Point upon which an Argument
could be based was ever mentioned or shown to exist. In a word; 'I
actually did not understand the point, nor purpose of either RFC1715 nor
RFC3194, because it seems that these RFCs were focused more upon the
Logarithmic Equation, rather than the reported objective regarding the
Efficiency Rating, and the Determination of the most efficient IP
Addressing scheme that should be used. Furthermore, while I have read
some mention regarding the 'Address Space Allocation Table(s), it was
never pointed out, that the 'Address Allocation Table' (Or "INTERNET
PROTOCOL ADDRESS SPACE") could quite literally invalidate any calculation
regarding efficiency, because such a TABLE can also be INEFFICIENT.
E Terrell [Page 13]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Table 3
"Reality of the Mathematical Addressing Schematic for the
'IPt1' Addressing System Using the Modern Binary System."
(Where the Value for the variable 'Y' is given by the Laws
of the Octet, and the System contains 4.145 x 10^9 Addresses.)
1. Total IP Addresses for Class A = 126 x 254^3 = 2,064,770,064
Total available IP Addresses for Class A = 126 x 254^3
Total available IP Host Addresses Equals 126 x 254^N
(Where N = Number of Octet, and 'Y' equals the Address
Range '128 - 254', 1 - 126 is not included in the
Address Range Represented by the equation
'Y = 254 - 126'.)
Class A-1, 1 - 126, Default Subnet Mask 255.y.x.x:
1,040,514,048 Networks and 8,129,016 Hosts: 0
Class A-2, 1 - 126, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.y.x:
516,160,512 Networks and 32,004 Hosts
Class A-3, 1 - 126, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.y:
256,048,128 Networks and 126 Hosts
Class A-4, 1 - 126, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.255:
252,047,376 Network / MultiCast IP Addresses / AnyCast
2. Total IP Addresses for Class B = 64 x 254^3 = 1,048,772,096
Total available IP Addresses for Class B = 64 x 254^3
Total available IP Host Addresses Equals 64 x 254^N
(Where N = Number of Octet, and 'Y' equals the Address
Range '254 - Q'; 128 - 191 is not included in the
Address Range Represented by the equation
'Y = 254 - 64'.)
Class B-1, 128 - 191, Default Subnet Mask 255.y.x.x:
784,514,560 Networks and 4,129,024 Hosts: 10
Class B-2, 128 - 191, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.y.x:
197,672,960 Networks and 16,256 Hosts
Class B-3, 128 - 191, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.y:
49,807,360 Networks and 64 Hosts
Class B-4, 128 - 191, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.255:
16,777,216 Network / MultiCast IP Addresses / AnyCast
E Terrell [Page 14]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
3. Total IP Addresses for Class C = 32 x 254^3 = 524,386,048
Total available IP Addresses for Class C = 32 x 254^3
Total available IP Host Addresses Equals 32 x 254^N
(Where N = Number of Octet, and 'Y' equals the Address
Range '254 - Q'; 192 - 223 is not included in the
Address Range Represented by the equation
'Y = 254 - 32.)
Class C-1, 192 - 223, Default Subnet Mask 255.y.x.x:
458,321,664 Networks and 2,064,512 Hosts: 110
Class C-2, 192 - 223, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.y.x:
57,741,312 Networks and 8,128 Hosts
Class C-3, 192 - 223, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.y:
7,274,496 Networks and 32 Hosts
Class C-4, 192 - 223, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.255:
1,048,576 Network / MultiCast IP Addresses / AnyCast
4. Total IP Addresses for Class D = 16 x 254^3 = 262,193,024
Total available IP Addresses for Class D = 16 x 254^3
Total available IP Host Addresses Equals 16 x 254^N
(Where N = Number of Octet, and 'Y' equals the Address
Range '254 - Q'; 224 - 239 is not included in the
Address Range Represented by the equation
'Y = 254 - 16'.)
Class D-1, 224 - 239, Default Subnet Mask 255.y.x.x:
245,676,928 Networks and 1,032,256 Hosts: 1110
Class D-2, 224 - 239, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.y.x:
15,475,712 Networks and 4,064 Hosts
Class D-3, 224 - 239, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.y:
974,848 Networks and 16 Hosts
Class D-4, 224 - 239, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.255:
65,536 Network / MultiCast IP Addresses / AnyCast
E Terrell [Page 15]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
5. Total IP Addresses for Class E = 15 x 254^3 = 245,805,960
Total available IP Addresses for Class E = 15 x 254^3
Total available IP Host Addresses Equals 15 x 254^N
(Where N = Number of Octet, and 'Y' equals the Address
Range '254 - Q'; 240 - 254 is not included in the
Address Range Represented by the equation
'Y = 254 - 15'.)
Class E-1, 240 - 254, Default Subnet Mask 255.y.x.x:
231,289,860 Networks and 967,740 Hosts: 1111
Class E-2, 240 - 254, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.y.x:
13,658,850 Networks and 3,810 Hosts
Class E-3, 240 - 254, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.y:
806,625 Networks and 15 Hosts
Class E-4, 240 - 254, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.255:
50,625 Network / MultiCast IP Addresses / AnyCast
Table 4
Reality of the Structure of the
Addressing Schematic Design for the IPt2
Protocol Specification Using The Modern Binary System
Which yields a Combined Total
of 2.67 x 10^14 IP Addresses
'254' '254' One Copy Of
Total IP Area Code 'IPt1' Addressing
Zone IP Addresses Schematic
Addresses per per 'IP Area Code'
| | 'Zone IP' 253 x 254^3
v v Address IP Addresses
| Zone IP | IP Area Code | IP Address
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
... 255 : 255 : 255.000.000.000
| | |
V V V
<-Global-Net | InterNet | IntraNet
E Terrell [Page 16]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Table 5
"Reality of the Structure of the Schematic for the 'IPt2' IP Specification
Using the Modern Binary System."(Where the Value for the variable 'Y'
is given by the Laws of the Octet, and Total Number of Available
IP Addresses Equals 2.67 x 10^14.)
1. Total IP Addresses for 'Class A' having '254' 'Zone IP' Addresses
= 254 x 254 x 126 x 254^3
= 254 x 254 x 2,064,770,064
= 1.332107 x 10^14
Total of 254 IP 'IP Area Code' Addresses per 'Zone IP' Address
= 254 x 126 x 254^3
= 254 x 2,064,770,064
= 5.244516 x 10^11
Distribution per 'Zone IP' Address yielding the 'IP Area Code' Addresses
Class A-1, 1 - 126, Default Subnet Mask 255.y.x.x:
2.642906 x 10^11 Networks and 8,129,016 Hosts: 0
Class A-2, 1 - 126, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.y.x:
1.311048 x 10^11 Networks and 32,004 Hosts
Class A-3, 1 - 126, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.y:
6.503622 x 10^10 Networks and 126 Hosts
Class A-4, 1 - 126, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.255:
6.4020034 x 10^10 Network / MultiCast IP Addresses / AnyCast
E Terrell [Page 17]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
2. Total IP Addresses for 'Class B' having '254' 'Zone IP' Addresses
= 254 x 254 x 64 x 254^3
= 254 x 254 x 1,048,772,096
= 6.766258 x 10^13
Total of 254 IP 'IP Area Code' Addresses per 'Zone IP' Address
= 254 x 64 x 254^3
= 254 x 1,048,772,096
= 2.663881 x 10^11
Distribution per 'Zone IP' Address yielding the 'IP Area Code' Addresses
Class B-1, 128 - 191, Default Subnet Mask 255.y.x.x:
1.992667 x 10^11 Networks and 4,129,024 Hosts: 10
Class B-2, 128 - 191, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.y.x:
5.0208932 x 10^10 Networks and 16,256 Hosts
Class B-3, 128 - 191, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.y:
1.2651069 x 10^10 Networks and 64 Hosts
Class B-4, 128 - 191, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.255:
4.2614129 x 10^9 Network / MultiCast IP Addresses / AnyCast
E Terrell [Page 18]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
3. Total IP Addresses for 'Class C' having '254' 'Zone IP' Addresses
= 254 x 254 x 32 x 254^3
= 254 x 254 x 524,386,048
= 3.383129 x 10^13
Total of 254 IP 'IP Area Code' Addresses per 'Zone IP' Address
= 254 x 32 x 256^3
= 254 x 524,386,048
= 1.331941 x 10^11
Distribution per 'Zone IP' Address yielding the 'IP Area Code' Addresses
Class C-1, 192 - 223, Default Subnet Mask 255.y.x.x:
1.164137 x 10^11 Networks and 2,064,512 Hosts: 110
Class C-2, 192 - 223, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.y.x:
1.466629 x 10^10 Networks and 8,128 Hosts
Class C-3, 192 - 223, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.y:
1.8477220 x 10^9 Networks and 32 Hosts
Class C-4, 192 - 223, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.255:
2.663383 x 10^8 Network / MultiCast IP Addresses / AnyCast
E Terrell [Page 19]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
4. Total IP Addresses for 'Class D' having '254' 'Zone IP' Addresses
= 254 x 254 x 16 x 254^3
= 254 x 254 x 262,193,024
= 1.691558 x 10^13
Total of 254 IP 'IP Area Code' Addresses per 'Zone IP' Address
= 254 x 16 x 254^3
= 254 x 262,193,024
= 6.659677 x 10^10
Distribution per 'Zone IP' Address yielding the 'IP Area Code' Addresses
Class D-1, 224 - 239, Default Subnet Mask 255.y.x.x:
6.240194 x 10^10 Networks and 1,032,256 Hosts: 1110
Class D-2, 224 - 239, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.y.x:
3.930831 x 10^9 Networks and 4,064 Hosts
Class D-3, 224 - 239, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.y:
2.476114 x 10^8 Networks and 16 Hosts
Class D-4, 224 - 239, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.255:
1.6646144 x 10^7 Network / MultiCast IP Addresses / AnyCast
E Terrell [Page 20]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
5. Total IP Addresses for 'Class E' having '254' 'Zone IP' Addresses
= 254 x 254 x 15 x 254^3
= 254 x 254 x 245,805,960
= 1.585842 x 10^13
Total of 254 IP 'IP Area Code' Addresses per 'Zone IP' Address
= 254 x 15 x 254^3
= 254 x 245,805,960
= 6.243471 x 10^10
Distribution per 'Zone IP' Address yielding the 'IP Area Code' Addresses
Class E-1, 240 - 254, Default Subnet Mask 255.y.x.x:
5.874762 x 10^10 Networks and 967,740 Hosts: 1111
Class E-2, 240 - 254, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.y.x:
3.4693479 x 10^9 Networks and 3,810 Hosts
Class E-3, 240 - 254, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.y:
2.0488275 x 10^8 Networks and 15 Hosts
Class E-4, 240 - 254, Default Subnet Mask 255.255.255.255:
1.285875 x 10^7 Network / MultiCast IP Addresses / AnyCast
E Terrell [Page 21]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Chapter II: Suggestion for the IPt1 and IPt2 Internet Protocol Address
Space, Supernetting and the New 'CIDR' Notation
The "Internet Protocol v4 Address Space" allocation Table, as noted in
'Table 1' above, can retain the same IP Address Allocation, in the 'IPt1
IP Protocol Specification'. In fact, the only guide lines that would be
different, and appropriated, are those governing the 'Host' Address
Allocation, whose derivation is Defined by 'The Laws of the Octet'.
Furthermore, noting Table 2, it should be understood that it represents
an 'IP Address Allocation / Translation Guide', which would be used to
determine the total Number of Available IP Addresses when converting from
the IPv4 to the IPt1 Addressing Specifications. This Table represents
the IP Address conversion, which should be viewed as extremely important,
because the IPt1 Specification makes use of nearly all of the total number
of IP Addresses for use as the Network IP Address. And while there are
Host Addresses Assigned, there are No Viable network IP Addresses wasted
or used for this purpose (See The Laws of the Octet.).
Nevertheless, the description shown in Table 6 provides an Example, which
describes the 'Supernetting of an IP Address' when using the 'IPt1'
specification, which also uses the New Notation for 'CIDR'. However, this
is a Practice, 'Supernetting of an IP Address', that can only be used
BEHIND the 'Point of Demarcation' (The 'VIABLE Network IP Address'), for
the purpose of Subnet creation, because to do so otherwise would not only
be in violation of 'The Laws of the Octet', but it would create an
Addressing Conflict within the IP Addressing Scheme itself. Even still,
is should nevertheless be very clear, that the 'CIDR' Notation represents
the 'Bit Mapped Displacement' of the Network IP Address, and nothing more.
Moreover, since the IPt1 specification uses the same IP Addressing methods
for enumeration, as that used in IPv4. It can quite easily be employed, and
replace, in every scenario now occupied and used by the IPv4 Specification.
There is an exception however, which translates into recovery of wasted IP
Addresses that can be recovered from the "Internet Protocol v4 Address
Space". In other words, as previously mentioned, the primary difference
between these IP Specifications, beyond the Schematic itself, is the way
they each use and assign 'Host IP Addresses'. Where by, the assignment
of '1' IP Address, is just that, because there are No 16 Million Host IP
Addresses that will accompany this assignment under the IPt1 specification.
And while this may be viewed as a problem with the IPt1 specification, it
certainly does not become a consideration for the implementation of the
IPt2 Addressing Specification. In fact, the IPt2 Addressing Specification
not only provides foundation for the possibility for Unlimited IP
Addresses, it simplifies the "Internet Protocol Address Space" Table,
(See Table 7) while reducing the Management Burden associated with the
Allocation of IP Addresses.
E Terrell [Page 22]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
TABLE 6
IPt1 'Bit Mapped' IP Address Distribution
Derived from the Modern Method for Binary Enumeration
Using the 'CIDR' Notation
1 2 3 4
Network IP Address Number of Exponential Total
Class Range BITS equation Number of
/Starting Point yielding HOST
of the Network Total Number IP Addresses
Prefix: HOST
Number of Bits IP Addresses
| | | |
V V V V
"/New 'CIDR'
Notation"
CLASS A
Class A-1
0-126/00:8 = 8/8 = 2^X = 8,129,016
-------------------------------------------------------
Class A-2
0-126/00:16 = 16/8 = 2^X = 32,004
-------------------------------------------------------
E Terrell [Page 23]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Class A-3
0-126/00:24 = 24/8 = 2^X = 126
-------------------------------------------------------
Class A-4
0-126/00:25 = 25/8 = 2^7 = 128
| | |
V V V
0-126/00:30 = 30/8 = 2^2 = 4
0-126/00:31 = 31/8 = 2^1 = 2
0-126/00:32 = 32/8 = 2^0 = 0
CLASS B
Class B-1
0-126/10:8 = 8/16 = 2^X = 4,129,024
-------------------------------------------------------
E Terrell [Page 24]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Class B-2
128-191/10:16 = 16/16 = 2^X = 16,256
-------------------------------------------------------
Class B-3
128-191/10:24 = 24/16 = 2^X = 32
-------------------------------------------------------
Class B-4
128-191/10:25 = 25/16 = 2^7 = 128
| | |
V V V
128-191/10:30 = 30/16 = 2^4 = 4
128-191/10:31 = 31/16 = 2^1 = 2
128-191/10:32 = 32/16 = 2^0 = 0
E Terrell [Page 25]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
CLASS C
Class C-1
192-223/110:8 = 8/24 = 2^X = 2,064,512
-------------------------------------------------------
Class C-2
192-223/110:16 = 16/24 = 2^X = 8,128
-------------------------------------------------------
Class C-3
192-223/110:24 = 24/24 = 2^X = 32
-------------------------------------------------------
E Terrell [Page 26]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Class C-4
0-126/110:25 = 25/24 = 2^7 = 128
| | |
V V V
0-126/110:30 = 30/24 = 2^2 = 4
0-126/110:31 = 31/24 = 2^1 = 2
0-126/110:32 = 32/24 = 2^0 = 0
CLASS D
Class D-1
224-239/1110:8 = 8/28 = 2^X = 1,032,256
-------------------------------------------------------
Class D-2
224-239/1110:16 = 16/28 = 2^X = 4,064
-------------------------------------------------------
E Terrell [Page 27]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Class D-3
224-239/1110:24 = 24/28 = 2^X = 16
-------------------------------------------------------
Class D-4
224-239/1110:25 = 25/28 = 2^7 = 128
| | |
V V V
224-239/1110:30 = 30/28 = 2^2 = 4
224-239/1110:31 = 31/28 = 2^1 = 2
224-239/1110:32 = 32/28 = 2^0 = 0
CLASS E
Class E-1
240-254/1111:8 = 8/~29 = 2^X = 967,740
-------------------------------------------------------
E Terrell [Page 28]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Class E-2
240-254/1111:16 = 16/~29 = 2^X = 3,810
-------------------------------------------------------
Class E-3
240-254/1110:24 = 24/~29 = 2^X = 15
-------------------------------------------------------
Class E-4
240-254/1111:25 = 25/~29 = 2^7 = 128
| | |
V V V
240-254/1111:30 = 30/~29 = 2^2 = 4
240-254/1111:31 = 31/~29 = 2^1 = 2
240-254/1111:32 = 32/~29 = 2^0 = 0
E Terrell [Page 29]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Table 7
INTERNET PROTOCOL t2 ADDRESS SPACE
IPt2 IP Address Prefix IPt1 Address Distribution Date
/ | \ / Schematic \ /Purpose\ / \
CIDR Zone IP IP Area IP Address | |
Network | Code Assignment V V
Descriptor V
----------+--------+------------+----------------------+----------+--------
None 000: 000: 000.000.000.000 None 4/2002
All 001: All: XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX NA 4/2002
All 002: All: XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX SA 4/2002
All 003: All: XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX EU 4/2002
All 004: All: XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX OS 4/2002
All 005: All: XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX AU 4/2002
All 006: All: XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX AF 4/2002
All 007-254: All: XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX IANA/RESERVED 4/2002
All 001-254: 001-254: 000.000.000.000 IANA/EMERGENCY4/2002
00:8 255: 255: 127.000.000.000 IANA/LoopBack 4/2002
E Terrell [Page 30]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
INTERNET PROTOCOL t2 ADDRESS SPACE INDEX
CONTIENTS COUNTRIES IP AREA CODE DISTRIBUTION DATE COMMENTS
/ZONE IP\ / \ / \ / \ / \
------------+------------+----------------------------+-------+---------
'NA' | '3' '60' 4/2002 NONE
NORTH | UNITED
AMERICA | STATES '001 - 050:' 4/2002 NONE
001: |
| MEXICO '051 - 054:' 4/2002 NONE
IP AREA CODE |
CONTIENT | CANADA '055 - 060:' 4/2002 NONE
SURPLUS |
'194' |
------------+------------+----------------------------+-------+---------
'SA' | '38' '88' 4/2002 NONE
SOUTH |
AMERICA | Brazil '001 - 050:' 4/2002 NONE
002: |
| Antigua '051 - 052:' 4/2002 NONE
IP AREA CODE | and Barbuda
CONTIENT |
SURPLUS | Aruba '053:' 4/2002 NONE
'166' |
| Bahamas '054:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Barbados '055:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Cayman Islands '056:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Cuba '057:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Dominica '058:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Dominican Republic '059:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Grenada '060:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Guadeloupe '061:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Jamaica '062:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Haiti '063:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Martinique '064:' 4/2002 NONE
E Terrell [Page 31]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
|
| Puerto Rico '065:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Saint Kitts '066:' 4/2002 NONE
| and Nevis
|
|
| Saint Lucia '067:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Trinidad '068:' 4/2002 NONE
| and Tobago
|
|
| Virgin Islands '069:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Belize '070:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Costa Rica '071:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| El Salvador '072:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Guatemala '073:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Honduras '074:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Nicaragua '075:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Panama '076:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Argentina '077:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Bolivia '078:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Chile '079:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Colombia '080:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Ecuador '081:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| French Guiana '082:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Guyana '083:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Paraguay '084:' 4/2002 NONE
E Terrell [Page 32]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
|
| Peru '085:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Suriname '086:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Uruguay '087:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Venezuela '088:' 4/2002 NONE
|
|
------------+------------+----------------------------+-------+---------
'EU' | '45' '74' 4/2002 NONE
EUROPE |
| Belarus '001' 4/2002 NONE
003: |
| Russian '002 - 031:' 4/2002 NONE
IP AREA CODE | Federation
CONTIENT |
SURPLUS | Bulgaria '032:' 4/2002 NONE
'180' |
| Czech Republic '033:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Hungary '034:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Moldova '035:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Poland '036:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Romania '037:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Slovakia '038:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Ukraine '039:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Denmark '040:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Estonia '041:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Faeroe Islands '042:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Finland '043:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Iceland '044:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Ireland '045:' 4/2002 NONE
|
E Terrell [Page 33]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
| Latvia '046:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Lithuania '047:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Norway '048:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Sweden '049:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| United Kingdom '050:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Albania '051:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Andorra '052:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Bosnia '053:' 4/2002 NONE
| and Herzegowina
|
| Croatia (Hrvatska) '054:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Gibraltar '055:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Greece '056:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Vatican City State '057:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Italy '058:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Macedonia '059:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Malta '060:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Portugal '061:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| San Marino '062:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Slovenia '063:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Spain '064:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Yugoslavia '065:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Austria '066:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Belgium '067:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| France '068:' 4/2002 NONE
E Terrell [Page 34]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
|
| Germany '069:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Liechtenstein '070:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Luxembourg '071:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Monaco '072:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Netherlands '073:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Switzerland '074:' 4/2002 NONE
|
|
|
------------+------------+----------------------------+-------+---------
'OS' | '23' '23' 4/2002 NONE
OCEANIA |
STATES | Australia '001:' 4/2002 NONE
004: |
| Wallis '002:' 4/2002 NONE
IP AREA CODE | and Futuna Islands
CONTIENT |
SURPLUS | New Zealand '003:' 4/2002 NONE
'231' |
| Fiji '004:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Papua New Guinea '005:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| New Caledonia '006:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Solomon Islands '007:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Vanuatu '008:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Guam '009:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Kiribati '010:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Marshall Islands '011:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Micronesia '012:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Nauru '013:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Palau '014:' 4/2002 NONE
E Terrell [Page 35]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
|
| American Samoa '015:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Northern Mariana '016:' 4/2002 NONE
| Islands
|
| Cook Islands '017:' 4/2002 NONE
|
|
| French Polynesia '018:' 4/2002 NONE
| (Tahiti)
|
|
| Niue '019:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Pitcairn '020:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Samoa '021:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Tonga '022:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Tuvalu '023:' 4/2002 NONE
|
|
------------+------------+----------------------------+-------+---------
'AU' | '55' '55' 4/2002 NONE
AFRICAN |
UNION | Burundi '001' 4/2002 NONE
005: |
| Democratic '002:' 4/2002 NONE
IP AREA CODE | Republic of the Congo
CONTIENT |
SURPLUS | Djibouti '003:' 4/2002 NONE
'199' |
| Eritrea '004:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Ethiopia '005:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Kenya '006:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Madagascar '007:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Malawi '008:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Mauritania '009:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Mozambique '010:' 4/2002 NONE
E Terrell [Page 36]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
|
| Runion '011:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Rwanda '012:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Seychelles '013:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Somalia '014:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Tanzania '015:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Uganda '016:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Zambia '017:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Zimbabwe '018:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Angola '019:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Cameroon '020:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Chad '021:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Congo '022:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Equatorial Guinea '023:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Central African '024:' 4/2002 NONE
| Republic
|
| Gabon '025:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Sao Tome '026:' 4/2002 NONE
| and Principe
|
| Algeria '027:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Egypt '028:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Libyan Arab '029:' 4/2002 NONE
| Jamahiriya
|
| Morocco '030:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Sudan '031:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Tunisia '032:' 4/2002 NONE
E Terrell [Page 37]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
|
| Western Sahara '033:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Botswana '034:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Lesotho '035:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Namibia '036:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| South Africa '037:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Swaziland '038:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Benin '039:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Burkina Faso '040:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Cape Verde '041:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Cte d'Ivoire '042:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Gambia, The '043:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Ghana '044:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Guinea '045:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Guinea-Bissau '046:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Liberia '047:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Mali '048:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Mauritania '049:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Niger '050:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Nigeria '051:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Saint Helena '052:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Senegal '053:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Sierra Leone '054:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Togo '055:' 4/2002 NONE
E Terrell [Page 38]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
|
|
|
------------+------------+----------------------------+-------+---------
'AF' | '55' '151' 4/2002 NONE
ASIAN |
FEDERATION | China '001-051' 4/2002 NONE
006: |
| Japan '052:' 4/2002 NONE
IP AREA CODE |
CONTIENT | Korea (North) '053:' 4/2002 NONE
SURPLUS |
'103' | Korea (South) '054:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Macau '055:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Mongolia '056:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Taiwan '057:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Afghanistan '058:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Bangladesh '059:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Bhutan '060:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| India '061-111' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Iran '112:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Kazakhstan '113:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Kyrgyzstan '114:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Maldives '115:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Nepal '116:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Pakistan '117:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Sri Lanka '118:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Tajikistan '119:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Turkmenistan '120:' 4/2002 NONE
|
E Terrell [Page 39]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
| Uzbekistan '121:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Brunei Darussalam '122:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Cambodia '123:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| East Timor '124:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Indonesia '125:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Laos '126:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Malaysia '127:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Myanmar (Burma) '128:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Philippines '129:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Singapore '130:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Thailand '131:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Viet Nam '132:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Armenia '133:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Azerbaijan '134:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Bahrain '135:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Cyprus '136:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Georgia '137:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Iraq '138:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Israel '139:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Jordan '140:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Kuwait '141:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Lebanon '142:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Gambia, The '143:' 4/2002 NONE
E Terrell [Page 40]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
|
| Oman '144:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Qatar '145:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Palestine '146:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Saudi Arabia '147:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Syria '148:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| Turkey '149:' 4/2002 NONE
|
| United Arab '150:' 4/2002 NONE
| Emirates
|
| Yemen '151:' 4/2002 NONE
|
------------+------------+----------------------------+-------+---------
Nevertheless, any careful examination and study of Table 7, the "INTERNET
PROTOCOL t2 ADDRESS SPACE", and its INDEX. Anyone would readily conclude;
'It does not matter if the World's Population Doubled or Tripled in 5, 10,
or 15 years from now, because the number of IP Addresses contained in the
Surplus of IP Area Code Addresses, for each Continent, would presently
sustain a 20 Billion total World Population, and this says nothing about
the Reserve IP Addresses allocation to IANA. In fact, if there is an
agreement (which it will be) regarding the New Binary System, it will not
pose any difficulties for IANA, because these IP Specifications were
derived and first discovered, using the New Method of Enumeration, as
defined by the New Binary System. In other words, the IPt1 and IPt2 IP
Protocol Specifications overwhelmingly surpasses every Requirement
Specified in RFC1550.
E Terrell [Page 41]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Chapter III: IPt1 and IPt2; The APRA and IN-ADD.APRA Addresses
It has been mention that the IPt1 IP Specification differs only in 2
primary areas from that of the IPv4 IP Addressing system. And these
differences account for the use of more than 99.999...+ % of the total
number of available IP Addresses contained in this System of Addressing,
and the way Host IP Addresses are allocated. Needless to say, other than
the Schematic itself, that's it. In other words, the use of 'APRA and
IN-ADD.APRA functions the same in the IPt1 IP Specification, and except
for the 'SIGHT' of the Prefixes used in the IPt2 Specification, their use
functions the same under this IP Specification as well. In other words,
the Prefixes used in the IPt2 IP Specification, serve only the provisions
regarding stability, control, management, and increase the Number of IP
Addresses (And nothing more!). Because other than these benefits, the
Prefixes used in the IPt2 IP Specification does absolutely nothing to
effect, nor change any other the practices or procedures used in the
IPv4 Protocol. Furthermore, while I do not advocate the used of the
Primary IP Protocol in Networking Household Appliances, (behind the
demarcation). It should be clearly understood, not only is the IPt2 IP
Specification well suited for this application, but there is absolutely
Protocol Requirement, or Demand, it is not suited to address...And it goes
without saying, it does indeed, maintain a sufficient supply of IP
Addresses, regardless.
Table 8
IPt1 = 32 Bit
IPt2 = 64 Bit
IPt3 = 96 Bit
IPt4 = 128 Bit
IPt5 = 160 Bit
: : :
: : :
IPtX = Infinity
E Terrell [Page 42]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Chapter IV: Security
This document, whose only objective was the explanation for the
method(s) used in the Efficiency Determination of an IP Addressing
Specification, and the development of a possible (Suggestion) "INTERNET
PROTOCOL ADDRESS SPACE" for the 'IPt1 and IPt2 IP Addressing
Specifications', which actually did not directly raise any security
issues. Hence, there are no issues raised that warrant Security
Considerations.
E Terrell [Page 43]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
References
1. E. Terrell ( not published notarized, 1979 ) " The Proof of
Fermat's Last Theorem: The Revolution in Mathematical
Thought" Outlines the significance of the need for a thorough
understanding of the Concept of Quantification and the
Concept of the Common Coefficient. These principles, as well
many others, were found to maintain an unyielding importance
in the Logical Analysis of Exponential Equations in Number
Theory.
2. E. Terrell ( not published notarized, 1983 ) " The Rudiments
of Finite Algebra: The Results of Quantification "
Demonstrates the use of the Exponent in Logical Analysis, not
only of the Pure Arithmetic Functions of Number Theory, but
Pure Logic as well. Where the Exponent was utilized in the
Logical Expansion of the underlying concepts of Set Theory
and the Field Postulates. The results yield; another
Distributive Property (i.e. Distributive Law for Exponential
Functions) and emphasized the possibility of an Alternate
View of the Entire Mathematical field.
3. G Boole ( Dover publication, 1958 ) "An Investigation of The Laws of
Thought" On which is founded The Mathematical Theories of Logic and
Probabilities; and the Logic of Computer Mathematics.
4. R Carnap ( University of Chicago Press, 1947 / 1958 )
"Meaning and Necessity" A study in Semantics and Modal
Logic.
5. R Carnap ( Dover Publications, 1958 ) " Introduction to
Symbolic Logic and its Applications"
6. C. Huitema ( INRIA, November 1994), RFC 1715; "The H Ratio
for Address Assignment Efficiency".
7. Authors: Durand, A. and Huitema, C., "The Host-Density
Ratio for Address Assignment Efficiency: An update on
the H ratio", RFC 3194, SUN Microsystems/Microsoft,
November 2001.
8. Authors: Scott Bradner, and Allison Mankin; RFC1550 "IP: Next
Generation (IPng) White Paper Solicitation"
E Terrell [Page 44]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002
Author
Eugene Terrell
24409 Soto Road Apt. 7
Hayward, CA. 94544-1438
Voice: 510-537-2390
E-Mail: eterrell00@netzero.net
E Terrell [Page 45]
IPt1 and IPt2 ADDRESS SPACE October 15, 2002