On 18 Jul 18:28, Dmitry Gladkov wrote: > I like the idea, but I don't like the approach, it should be a > subclass of PositiveIntegerField, as it is an unsigned int on DB > level. Also, I agree with Łukasz that it should support both IPv6 and > IPv4.
IPAddressField appears to be v4 only for backwards compatibilty reasons, GenericIPAddressField covers both, so in theory I've got no problems with that, other than it making IPAddressField backwards incompatible which seems silly at this point, and I'd be recommending people to be using GenericIPAddressField anyways. -- Brett Parker -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
