Re: [OT] Re: Readiness for IPV6

["Stephen Sprunk" <ssprunk () cisco com>]

Thus spake "Matthew S. Hallacy" <poptix () techmonkeys org>
> Looks like it still claims to be the MS-DOS command interpreter to me,
> using the 'user friendly' name of 'Command Prompt' doesn't change
> what it is.

cmd.exe is a program which interprets MS-DOS commands.  That doesn't mean it's
DOS.

> > btw.. DOS == command.com, NT = cmd.exe, there *is* a difference.
>
> Yes, one is named command.com, one is named cmd.exe, it was easier
> than typing start <cmd> from the DOS command prompt.

cmd.exe is a native Win32 console app; command.com is a CP/M program image
running under DOS emulation in Virtual8086 mode.  There's a big difference
there.

My PC can quack, but that doesn't mean it's a duck.

> > I think the problem is reading the docs is difficult.
> > IPv6 will be/is autoconfig all the way fortunatly so those
> > 'native config' tools isn't going to be used by a lot of people.
>
> Users do not read documentation.

Presumably the final release of the IPv6 stack will be GUIfied like the IPv4
stack was.  Microsoft is fortunately more concerned with getting their stack
working than creating an idiot-proof installer for a beta product.

S