<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Opera 10.50 fixes IPv6 problem</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fix6.net/archives/2010/03/02/opera-10-50-fixes-ipv6-problem/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fix6.net/archives/2010/03/02/opera-10-50-fixes-ipv6-problem/</link>
	<description>Beyond 32 bits</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Aug 2011 06:28:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Driscoll</title>
		<link>http://www.fix6.net/archives/2010/03/02/opera-10-50-fixes-ipv6-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-100</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Driscoll</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 16:55:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fix6.net/?p=30224#comment-100</guid>
		<description>This is great news, to see the problem quantified and to see such a large portion of the problem going away.

However I don&#039;t know if websites would &quot;lose&quot; these customers if the browser used the Teredo connection instead of IPv4, instead wouldn&#039;t they just get a slower/degraded experience?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is great news, to see the problem quantified and to see such a large portion of the problem going away.</p>
<p>However I don&#8217;t know if websites would &#8220;lose&#8221; these customers if the browser used the Teredo connection instead of IPv4, instead wouldn&#8217;t they just get a slower/degraded experience?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using memcached

Served from: www.fix6.net @ 2012-02-09 05:24:04 -->
