https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=4964
--- Comment #20 from Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-03-12 02:32:04 PST --- (In reply to comment #18) > > question. Should ::ffff:127.0.0.1, ipv4 127.0.0.1, and ::1 be considered > > equivalent? ::ffff:127.0.0.1 is ipv4 127.0.0.1 represented as an > > IPv4-mapped > > address. ::1 is the ipv6-native loopback address. > > > > I think all 3 represent the loopback and should be considered equivalent > > in our code. at least, ::ffff:127.0.0.1 and 127.0.0.1 are the same addr > > represented differently so should be equal. > > They are not the same address. 127.0.0.0/8 is a host-local network and > 127.0.0.1 is just a commonly used address from that range for a loopback > interface. In IPv6 there is only one such address, the ::1. > > If there is a need to group addresses in sets, these could be: > - unspecified address 0.0.0.0 and ::, > - host-local address space (127.0.0.0/8, ::1) > - link-local address space (169.254.0.0/16, fe80::/10) > - site-local IPv6 address space (now deprecated) fec0::/10 > - IPv4 private-use address space (RFC 1918) > - multicast, broadcast, anycast address space I don't think we need to add special cases for these. host-local address space is the only that's likely to be common in the field, and your point regarding that above is a good one. > Also: > - IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses ::FFFF:d.d.d.d (or in its hex form) should be > equivalent to d.d.d.d; +1 > - IPv4-compatible IPv6 address ::d.d.d.d should NOT be equivalent to d.d.d.d; +1 > - 127.0.0.1 should NOT be equivalent to ::1 (and similarly, link-local IPv6 > and link-local IPv4 addresses should not be equivalent; ok. Daryl said: > There's no reason to ignore the fact that they're not the same though. Just > add both to the built in (and always required) defaults. We don't allow not > using 127/8 (we prepend it to anything configured) so just do the same for > ::1. that sounds like an acceptable course of action. +1 -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
