1 files changed, 3 insertions, 3 deletions
diff --git a/README_v6 b/README_v6
index 72d25a3..6a5a82a 100644
--- a/README_v6
+++ b/README_v6
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 Q: Why is there no v6-support in opentracker?
-A: Although I tried very hard, implementing v6 right now would be a terrible waste of bandwidth, there is no compact format for v6 addresses, so instead of 
+A: Although I tried very hard, implementing v6 right now would be a terrible waste of bandwidth, there is no compact format for v6 addresses, so instead of
-answering "d5:peers6:AAAAPPe" I'd have to send "d5:peersld2:ip39:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA4:port2:PPPPeee" for a single peer. Even if there was a 
+answering "d5:peers6:AAAAPPe" I'd have to send "d5:peersld2:ip39:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA4:port2:PPPPeee" for a single peer. Even if there was a
 compact mode, v6 addresses still would eat up thrice the memory, v4 addresses take. This, however, wouldn't be a show stopper.
-Other problems concern efficient peer selection for obviously v6-capable peers and how to select peers for non-v6 clients. v6 addresses eat up more memory on the 
+Other problems concern efficient peer selection for obviously v6-capable peers and how to select peers for non-v6 clients. v6 addresses eat up more memory on the
 host, too ;)

diff --git a/README_v6 b/README_v6 index 72d25a3..6a5a82a 100644 --- a/README_v6 +++ b/README_v6
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
1	Q: Why is there no v6-support in opentracker?	1	Q: Why is there no v6-support in opentracker?
2		2
3	A: Although I tried very hard, implementing v6 right now would be a terrible waste of bandwidth, there is no compact format for v6 addresses, so instead of	3	A: Although I tried very hard, implementing v6 right now would be a terrible waste of bandwidth, there is no compact format for v6 addresses, so instead of
4	answering "d5:peers6:AAAAPPe" I'd have to send "d5:peersld2:ip39:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA4:port2:PPPPeee" for a single peer. Even if there was a	4	answering "d5:peers6:AAAAPPe" I'd have to send "d5:peersld2:ip39:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA4:port2:PPPPeee" for a single peer. Even if there was a
5	compact mode, v6 addresses still would eat up thrice the memory, v4 addresses take. This, however, wouldn't be a show stopper.	5	compact mode, v6 addresses still would eat up thrice the memory, v4 addresses take. This, however, wouldn't be a show stopper.
6		6
7	Other problems concern efficient peer selection for obviously v6-capable peers and how to select peers for non-v6 clients. v6 addresses eat up more memory on the	7	Other problems concern efficient peer selection for obviously v6-capable peers and how to select peers for non-v6 clients. v6 addresses eat up more memory on the
8	host, too ;)	8	host, too ;)