2 ms·
Don’t need dual stack, just one updated. Further addresses would have stayed readable and there wouldn’t be two bindings per adapter etc. When typing addresses
by mixmastamyk 6mo ago
Don’t need dual stack, just one updated.
Further addresses would have stayed readable and there wouldn’t be two bindings per adapter etc.
When typing addresses first byte is optional and defaults to zero. Problem solved. I saw this strategy work well with Brazilian phone numbers.
Partial rollout is not a problem to me at home but multiple address gibberish is.
- throw0101a 6mo agoA node having 198.51.100.42 and 7.198.51.100.42 (or 198.51.100.42.7) is dual-stack: one address is for the IPv4 protocol and other is for the IPv7 the protocol. You need different DNS records for IPv7 and new API calls. You need Happy Eyeballs so that if 7.198.51.100.42 fails your application falls back to 198.51.100.42. It's the exact same situation.
- mixmastamyk 6mo agoThere’s not two there’s one, the longer. There will be old equipment that can’t handle the new but would have been mostly replaced over time, perhaps a deadline. Like phone numbers or hdtv. Now think a better name is IPv4+.
- tardedmeme 6mo agoSounds identical to IPv6, but with only one new byte instead of 12 new bytes.
- mixmastamyk 6mo agoAs mentioned three times now, the addresses would be readable, and there would not be two stacks. Much less complexity. So no, not identical.