https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6484

[email protected] changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |software+spamassas...@kd6lv
                   |                            |w.ampr.org

--- Comment #8 from [email protected] 2010-12-13 14:07:17 
UTC ---
"0:0:0:0:0:FFFF:192.0.2.1" is definently not canonical and per some RFCs not
even valid, because where there are multiple 0-quads, the longest group [2 or
more consecutive] MUST be collapsed to "::" - i.e. compressed form is required
where possible (RFC 5952, Section 4.2.1 - which updates RFC 4291).  As the IPv4
embedded forms which express the IPv4 address in its canonical form
("alternative form") lie both within ::/80, there will be at most 6 separators.
 Although IPv4 addresses lie within 2002::/16, they are not expressed as such
but remain IPv6 quads.

Per RFC 5952, your "alternative forms" are not valid, and therefore, I see no
need to expand the regex to validate them, even if they are translatable into
equivalent valid forms.

-- 
Note:  I am in agreement with all of RFC 5952 except section 4.3 as that
section contradicts 50+ years of computer science history.  Canonical form for
any non-decimal hexadecimal digit (or any radix 11-36) is an upper-case
alphabetic, regardless of context.

-- 
Configure bugmail: 
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

Reply via email to