The geek in me wants to express the my web site as the IPv6 address ::1. Unfortunately the software on the SE sites doesn't play along. It strips the brackets from the URL. I.e. http://[::1] becomes http://::1 (as evidenced in my profile).

Could you please support the format described in RFC 2732? Of course this isn't exactly a priority feature and I realize that. Would be still nice to have.

Quoted from section 2

To use a literal IPv6 address in a URL, the literal address should be enclosed in "[" and "]" characters. For example the following literal IPv6 address:


would be represented as in the following example URL:

  • @kiamlaluno: thanks for the edit. Excellent idea. Commented Apr 8, 2013 at 12:04
  • I didn't add the quote; I just approved the edit. :) The thanks goes to @JamesDonnelly.
    – apaderno
    Commented Apr 8, 2013 at 12:15
  • Oh yeah, indeeed. Sorry. And thanks to @JamesDonnelly :) Commented Apr 8, 2013 at 12:26

1 Answer 1


We all have to make the transition to IP6, sooner or later.

If we are able to type in clickable URLs with IP6 addresses in all posts and comments, the Q&A process about this important and surprisingly slow-moving development will be a bit easier for everyone. With the clout that the SE network has in the IT world, it might even make a difference.

Looking forward to clickable IP6 URLs on the SE network!

Edited to add: A quick test here of stackoverflow.com indicates that the SE network does not support IPv6, so maybe it is not realistic to push this request before there is support for IPv6 from the SE sites. From a psychological (for want of a better word) perspective, not technical, of course.

  • 2
    But since numeric (clickable) URLs are not supported, I'd guess that numeric IPv6 URLs would meet the same fate. Commented Apr 8, 2013 at 10:39
  • 3
    If we are able to type in clickable URLs with IP6 addresses in all posts and comments... I don't see any reason for this. If you want to post an URL, use the address, not the IP. IPs change from time to time, that would effectively kill the link. Also it makes it unreadable and you don't know where that link will take you. Commented Apr 8, 2013 at 11:18
  • @SulfurizedDemonbobby the reason would be that during development and trouble shooting (two core activities for users of at least the IT-centered SE sites) often is easier with just a numeric address rather than having to go through a DNS. But I agree that numeric addresses are not eternal, but then again, neither are DNS records.
    – Monolo
    Commented Apr 8, 2013 at 11:27
  • 2
    @Monolo: If you have a question which you need to link against your testing system, there's something wrong with the question. Commented Apr 8, 2013 at 11:40
  • @SulfurizedDemonbobby: exactly that is bound to change (shifting IP addresses). It will probably happen again when you sign up with an ISP, because there are privacy concerns with IPv6 addresses as well. Commented Apr 8, 2013 at 11:58
  • @JoachimSauer: works in profiles ... Commented Apr 8, 2013 at 11:59
  • @SulfurizedDemonbobby No one is talking about linking to test systems, so no need to imply that. Just saying that supporting IPv6 and its numeric representation of addresses would make a lot of sense, and personally I find that the clout of the SE network could provide a meaningful nudge in the right direction.
    – Monolo
    Commented Apr 8, 2013 at 12:17

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .