Post #2098226

2023-06-24 18:30 UTC

@sindarina @miki Please don't disregard reasons as excuses. The reasons were given and the RFC does *not* address these points, unfortunately. tl;dr: Example addresses that don't like example addresses despite being standardized in RFCs aren't *that* helpful to those who don't actually know that RFC.

Replies (2)

@sindarina@ngmx.com 2023-06-24 18:36

@ljrk @miki Which is why posts like these are made, complete with links to the relevant sources. Habit is no excuse, and neither is ignorance. If you are concerned that people may not realise it is provided as an example, you should document this, within the context you are using it, because that part of your argument applies regardless of which address you use as an example.

Open ##2098227
@benaryorg@catcatnya.com 2023-06-24 20:38

@ljrk@todon.eu @sindarina@ngmx.com @miki@dragonscave.space If someone is required to provide a valid IP address, then why not put an IP address from said documentation ranges there and throw an error of some sorts if one of those addresses was used? That way you won't run into someone who actually does have access to 1.2.3.4 who cannot use your app or service because of Assumption™ because those addresses are guaranteed to not be in use. Also throwing an error is the right thing to do when someone is required to change something but hasn't IMHO.

Open ##3354929