4 ms·
It's a silly bikeshed, but I wish they'd gone for hyphens as separators rather than colons. There's something about [abcd-ef12-3456-7890-abcd-ef12-3456-789
by jml7c5 5y ago
It's a silly bikeshed, but I wish they'd gone for hyphens as separators rather than colons. There's something about
[abcd-ef12-3456-7890-abcd-ef12-3456-7890]
that's nicer to read than
[abcd:ef12:3456:7890:abcd:ef12:3456:7890]
- nightfly 5y agoIt's probably not like that because then you could have something be both a valid hostname and a valid ip address
- usr1106 5y agoNot if you always use the square brackets. Which is of course slightly awkward to type every single time.
- jml7c5 5y agoYeah, I realized that just after I posted my reply. As usr1106 mentioned, the solution would be to always use square brackets. It would take up more space, but I think it would still be better for at least two reasons: • Even with the brackets, it always takes the same or fewer keypresses (no need to press shift). • It's easier to tell when the address starts and ends. This is helpful when you get into odd addresses like "xxxx::xxxx.192.168.123.234", or "::1", or "::". The versions [xxxx--xxxx.192.168.123.234], [--1], and [--] look nicer and more obvious, at least to me. But of course this is all silly to go over now, decades after the decision. We'll save these changes for IPv8! :-P
- hansel_der 5y agoit's absolutely not bikeshedding. anecdote: a few years ago there was a quiz at one of the ripe-conferences where participants were asked to pick the one invalid ipv6 address out of four. iirc the success rate was even below what would result from a random-pick