> What is the difference between
> 192.168.1.10:80 and 192.168.1.10::80 ?
I've never seen the latter syntax.
--
Barry Margolin, bar...@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
> In article <4133fb2b$0$4089$ba62...@news.skynet.be>, <RR> wrote:
>>What is the difference between
>>192.168.1.10:80 and 192.168.1.10::80 ?
Probably a mistake by someone. :: is used as a seperator in IPv6, but
that's not a valid IPv6 address, either.
> I've never seen the latter syntax.
How helpful. Why did you even bother replying?
--
Jasper Bryant-Greene
Cabbage Promotions
> Barry Margolin wrote:
>
> > In article <4133fb2b$0$4089$ba62...@news.skynet.be>, <RR> wrote:
> >>What is the difference between
> >>192.168.1.10:80 and 192.168.1.10::80 ?
>
> > I've never seen the latter syntax.
>
> How helpful. Why did you even bother replying?
Perhaps because if Barry hasn't seen it, it probably doesn't exist.
As you confirmed in your post:
> Probably a mistake by someone. :: is used as a seperator in IPv6, but
> that's not a valid IPv6 address, either.
--KW 8-)
--
Keith Wansbrough <kw...@cl.cam.ac.uk>
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/kw217/
University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory.
At least he was polite ... and he was the first one to reply (by a
longshot). Hearing one other person's comment was probably helpful to
the OP.
Why did you feel you had to comment on his reply?
Casey