Conversation
|
@GotenXiao, @Crabbey and @VibroAxe I know we briefly spoke about this on Discord, it's probably worthwhile unifying this along with the other IPv6 PR's where relevant. Should I rebase this and change the Just looking for direction so the changes I'm making both to the docs and |
|
This issue has been automatically marked as inactive because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. |
|
Oops, forgot to flag this as an enhancement The main issue is that ipv6 isn't the issue, it's the fact that the various tunnelling configs setup by the user tend to result in things missing the cache. Not really sure how we get round that until v6 in the house becomes more functional |
|
We're also planning a large refactor to make generic depend on monolithic, not the other way round which will probably require some extensive modifications to this PR/moving it into monolithic |
|
Is this still relevant? If so, what is blocking it? Is there anything you can do to help move it forward? This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. |
This is the first part in a set of changes to add IPv6 support.
Tasks Remaining:
lancachenet/docker-compose