MSGID: 2:240/1120.29 473fbe83   
   CHRS: UTF-8 4   
   TZUTC: 0100   
   REPLY: 2:280/464 622b4f0e   
   //Hello Wilfred,//   
      
   on *11.03.22* at *13:29:26* You wrote in Area *WINPOINT*   
   to *Tim Schattkowsky* about *"Re^2:  WinPoint Version 404 IPV5"*.   
      
    WvV> Hi Tim,   
      
    WvV> On 2022-03-11 13:07:04, you wrote to me:   
      
    TS>> I have changed WP to use the first address returned by the OS. We have   
    TS>> to test if that works as expected.   
      
    WvV> And if the first fails or times out, it should move on to the next   
    WvV> (that's what binkd does)...   
      
   Yes, that is the idea. But this is a little more work and thus not something I   
   do right now. Again, this currently makes preferring IPv4 over IPv6 probably   
   the better choice, as it addresses exactly the scenario where the fallback   
   would be needed.   
      
   I still keep thinking (and nothing brought forward so far has been a valid   
   argument against it) that in practice there are usually only benefits and no   
   drawbacks of preferring IPv4 over IPv6 when both are available. On the other   
   side, there usually exists absolutely no benefit for the user in choosing IPv6   
   in that scenario.     
      
   Regards,   
   Tim   
      
   --- WinPoint 406.0   
    * Origin: Original WinPoint Origin! (2:240/1120.29)   
   SEEN-BY: 1/120 15/0 18/0 106/201 123/0 129/331 138/146 153/7715 218/700   
   SEEN-BY: 229/110 317 426 428 664 700 240/1120 250/1 266/512 275/100   
   SEEN-BY: 275/1000 282/1038 291/111 292/854 301/1 317/3 320/219 335/364   
   SEEN-BY: 342/11 371/0 396/45 460/58 640/1321 712/848 2452/250 3634/0   
   SEEN-BY: 3634/12   
   PATH: 240/1120 3634/12 153/7715 229/426