Reply to post:

OK, this time it's for real: The last available IPv4 address block has gone

Lee D Silver badge

I'm implementing my rule again, Reg.

When YOU BOTHER to put an IPv6 address on your website, as already supported by your browsers, DNS host, webserver, content delivery network, and everything in between... THEN you can be sarcastic about a poor IPv6 deployment statistic.

It's companies like you that are precisely the problem. "We've got our IPv4, and it would 'take effort' to make everything work for IPv6, so why bother?" is the attitude you've given for... what... 8 years? Maybe more. I'll check my comment history where I have about half-a-dozen annual "Yeah, we're going to look into that next year" things.

I mean, at least you did eventually get around to SSL. But, honestly, you should restrain yourself from sarcastic IPv6 comments until you at least have an AAAA record on a beta-domain:

https://mxtoolbox.com/SuperTool.aspx?action=a%3atheregister.co.uk&run=toolpage#

Your DNS hosting provider is "Cloudflare"

For anyone else, it would just be annoying but for a TECH SITE it's downright rude. It's like writing articles dissing Windows 10 for not keeping up to date while running XP in all your offices.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019