Subject: RFC-2001-06-24-000 - 2001 A Space Odyssey

From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 10:48:41 -0500

2001 A Space Odyssey
http://www.strafe.com/2001/

http://www.networksorcery.com/enp/rfc/rfc25.txt
"Because it may be desirable to reserve one or more link numbers for
instrumentation purposes, and because 256 link numbers are many more
than are needed, we suggest that no link number over 63 be used.  At
UCLA, we will implement our tables to take advantage of this limitation.
We also note that 32 may be even more realistic, but 64 is certainly
sufficient."
-------------

Request for Comment - RFC-2001-06-24-000 - 2001 A Space Odyssey

Are 3 digits sufficient for the RFC-YYYY-MM-DD-xxx Numbering Plan ?

000-999 vs. some binary limit like 64...

These RFCs can then be linked from 2D Space to 3D Space to help people
migrate from FlatLand. http://www.FlatLand.com

Jim Fleming
http://www.unir.com
Mars 128n 128e
http://www.unir.com/images/architech.gif
http://www.unir.com/images/address.gif
http://www.unir.com/images/headers.gif
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt
http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/tpipv6/start.asp
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12213.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12223.html