4 ms·
The article has an edit at the end suggesting double-dot to avoid the confusion. > IPv6 is not meant to be usually exposed to endusers. "You're holding it wro
by vacri 11y ago
The article has an edit at the end suggesting double-dot to avoid the confusion.
> IPv6 is not meant to be usually exposed to endusers.
"You're holding it wrong". This is a crap argument against the article. Network admins have to manipulate this stuff all the time, and the article is written from the point of view of a netadmin, not an enduser. It's trying to describe both a problem (lack of client uptake despite support; struggles with human comprehension) and a potential solution. The idea that humans would never have to look at an ip6 address has proven to be a fantasy.
- walshemj 11y agoAgreed this why ipv6 is textbook case in how not to define a standard.
- lurkinggrue 11y agoI admit I look at ipv6 and cringe at the thoughts of implementing it.
- bigbugbag 11y agoThe double dot suggestion is a knee jerk reaction without any thinking put into it. And this is a non starter as ipv6 is an established and widely deployed standard for 10+ years, ranting about it could have been done differently will achieve nothing apart impacting the author reputation.