It appears that Murray S. Kucherawy <[email protected]> said:
>> We all agreed that the current regular expressions for IP addresses are
>> wrong and don't match what people send. The question was whether to try
>> to replace them with ...
>Does this have to be done with a regexp? Is it enough to say
>"syntactically valid per RFC xxxx" (and cite something appropriate)?
Good point. We could remove the whole IPaddress type from the schema and just
make it a string. We don't cite a reference for an IP address syntax now, nobody
has ever been confused (beyond ignoring the current regex and sending whatever
their IP address library sends) so I don't think we need to add one now.
<xs:complexType name="RowType">
<xs:sequence>
<!-- The connecting IP, must be a valid IPv4 or IPv6 address. -->
<xs:element name="source_ip" type="xs:string"
minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="1"/>
<!-- The number of messages for which the
PolicyEvaluatedType was applied. -->
<xs:element name="count" type="xs:integer"
minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="1"/>
<!-- The DMARC disposition applied to matching messages. -->
<xs:element name="policy_evaluated" type="PolicyEvaluatedType"
minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="1"/>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
>I ask because after poking around a bit, I found that there is (amazingly)
>no standard for what constitutes a syntactically valid IPv4 address.
No kidding, and there's been some really funky IPv4 address parsers over the
years. Some of them treat a leading zero to mean an octal number, some allow a
single large integer, and there are a lot of different ideas about where to put
the implicit zeros in an address like 1.2 or 1.2.3. I propose we deal with none
of those and let sleeping dogs lie.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
