This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/ipv6-wg@ripe.net/
[ipv6-wg] Disband IPv6 WG
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Disband IPv6 WG
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Disband IPv6 WG
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Anton Rieger
inrin at jikken.de
Sat Oct 5 18:16:36 CEST 2019
>> - It MUST only have numbers and dots "." >> > >Maybe we should allow IPv6 addresses to be written in dotted quad format >with the quads not being limited to 0..255 but instead 0..4294967295 > >So instead of writing 2001:4860:4860::8888 we would write >536954976.1214251008.0.34952 which is clearly easier to use. Why not just use the pure decimal form? 168427777 -> 10.10.1.1 For IPv4 the BSD/Posix-Network stack accepts them anyway > >bonus: your old regex ^[0-9]*\.[0-9]*\.[0-9]*\.[0-9]*$ will still work bonus: regex is just: ^[0-9]*$ or even ^\d+$ But joking aside: What I'm missing here is the beauty of IPv6 subnet topology: Because we have so much quibbles it's easier to organize your networks: 2001:db8:<customer>:<vlan>::/64 e.g. 2001:db8:4321:7::/64 In the IPv4 net many are scattered (right now) Anton
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Disband IPv6 WG
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Disband IPv6 WG
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]