Update: UltraVNC 1.4.3.6 and UltraVNC SC 1.4.3.6: https://forum.uvnc.com/viewtopic.php?t=37885
Important: Please update to latest version before to create a reply, a topic or an issue: https://forum.uvnc.com/viewtopic.php?t=37864

Join us on social networks and share our announcements:
- Website: https://uvnc.com/
- GitHub: https://github.com/ultravnc
- Mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@ultravnc
- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ultravnc1
- X/Twitter: https://x.com/ultravnc1
- Reddit community: https://www.reddit.com/r/ultravnc
- OpenHub: https://openhub.net/p/ultravnc

UltraVNC 1.2.2.2 - Download links

Post Reply
MorrisonR
Posts: 4
Joined: 2018-05-01 20:48

Re: Release 1.2.2.2

Post by MorrisonR »

Do we have a changelog? On 1.2.2.1 and curious what changed.
Craig87
8
8
Posts: 17
Joined: 2018-08-27 18:34

Re: Release 1.2.2.2

Post by Craig87 »

Any chance of an MSI installer with IPv6 support?

Thanks.
User avatar
Rudi De Vos
Admin & Developer
Admin & Developer
Posts: 6863
Joined: 2004-04-23 10:21
Contact:

Re: Release 1.2.2.2

Post by Rudi De Vos »

IPv6 had to many errors and need to be reimplemented.
There is no msi or normal installer with ipv6.
Craig87
8
8
Posts: 17
Joined: 2018-08-27 18:34

Re: Release 1.2.2.2

Post by Craig87 »

Rudi De Vos wrote:IPv6 had to many errors and need to be reimplemented.
There is no msi or normal installer with ipv6.
Ok. We use Direct Access in our environment, so IPv6 support is very handy. We will stick with the older version for now. Thanks.
User avatar
Rudi De Vos
Admin & Developer
Admin & Developer
Posts: 6863
Joined: 2004-04-23 10:21
Contact:

Re: Release 1.2.2.2

Post by Rudi De Vos »

Is ipv6 this working correct ?
We didn't got a lot of feedback after implementation.

Seems that the option still is in the code and just require a special build.
If you are willing to test it with feedback i can run some testbuild.
Craig87
8
8
Posts: 17
Joined: 2018-08-27 18:34

Re: Release 1.2.2.2

Post by Craig87 »

Rudi De Vos wrote:Is ipv6 this working correct ?
We didn't got a lot of feedback after implementation.

Seems that the option still is in the code and just require a special build.
If you are willing to test it with feedback i can run some testbuild.
It seemed to worked fine for us. And sure, happy to test.
Post Reply