On Tue, Sep 22, 1998 at 02:11:09PM +1000, Dean Pemberton wrote:
On Tue, Sep 22, 1998 at 03:56:42PM +1200, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
On Tue, Sep 22, 1998 at 03:38:16PM +1200, Joe Abley wrote:
Unless the remote site happens to have a machine on their internal network, reachable by their mail relay, numbered 10.99.98.97 :)
0 chance of having that. (Statistically speaking, allowing for rounding errors).
Guess we're right off the end of the bell curve then :) How about...
127.0.0.2?
'fraid not - there are devices that use 127.0.0.2 as a valid address.
I think I liked the "all hail Joe" comment better :)
--
Joe Abley