Pac files for BB10: Hosts 127.0.0.1 vs. 0.0.0.0

I have created some pac files, which I want to use on BB10 devices, Windows and perhaps other operating systems.

I have used the template from this source:

https://security.berkeley.edu/resour...ernet-explorer

and then just added a fair number of TLDs or (sub-)domains with ||dnsDomainIs(host, "")

It seems to work flawlessly now, but there is one last point that I want to understand:

Should I use

) {return "DIRECT";
}return "PROXY http://127.0.0.1:3421";}

or should I use

) {return "DIRECT";
}return "PROXY http://0.0.0.0:3421";}

Both options basically do work and unwanted urls are blocked.
And since I have heard that host 0.0.0.0. is faster (on Windows), I would prefer 0.0.0.0.

However, I worry about potenital side effects.

Does anyone have experience with this? Any pros and cons?

The proper IP for the local device loopback is 127.0.0.1. This is part of the IP standard, so why even muck around with a non-standard IP?


Posted via CB10

Originally Posted by rthonpm

The proper IP for the local device loopback is 127.0.0.1. This is part of the IP standard, so why even muck around with a non-standard IP?
Posted via CB10

Good point.

The only good reason for 0.0.0.0 is the better performance.
This is what I got from a quick Google search

Blocking Unwanted Connections with a Hosts File

Using a Hosts File To Make The Internet Not Suck (as much) (0.0.0.0 version)

https://delightlylinux.wordpress.com...he-hosts-file/

So actually the "standard" for host files seems to be rather 0.0.0.0 these days, however, I am wondering if there is any concrete reason to advise against it on BB10.