In message <[email protected]>, Seiichi Kawamura writes:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> >> management tools/etc.  Sometimes that's unavoidable, but
> >> the point of a recommendation is to avoid problems
> >> whenever you can.
> 
> You do have a point there.
> 
> WindowsXP(netstat)  [2001:db8::1]:80
> FreeBSD7.1(netstat)  2001:db8::1.80
> FreeBSD7.1(ipfw)     [2001:db8::1]:80
> Linux CentOS4(netstat) 2001:db8::1:80
> linux+apache   [2001:db8::1]:80

> square brackets may be the more popular
> but this is debatable. For example
> Unbound's log gives "2001:db8::1 port 53"
> and that's not so bad.

named 2001:500:7::79#53 and 198.133.199.4#53
tcpdump 2001:470:1f00:820:214:22ff:fed9:fbdc.61867 and 207.46.216.54.80

IPv4 added for comparision.
 
> Are there others who think this should be
> covered in the draft? Any ideas?
> 
> Regards,
> Seiichi
> 
> 
> Dave Thaler wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> >> Seiichi Kawamura
> >> Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 6:05 PM
> >> To: Dave Thaler
> >> Cc: 6man; Brian E Carpenter
> >> Subject: Re: Review requested: draft-kawamura-ipv6-text-representation-
> >> 02
> >>
> >>>> Yep, the problem with the notation quoted in Brian Haley's email is
> >>>> that "2001:4860:b003::68:80" when viewed without knowing the context
> >>>> is ambiguous as to whether it's an IPv6 address, or an IPv6 address +
> >>>> port 80.
> > Yes, this is the most ambiguous of the situations.
> > 
> > BTY, FreeBSD gives. I'm pretty used to this.
> > 133.205.1.1.80
> > 2001:260::1.80
> > 
> > IMHO, the way port numbers are presented is not really
> > a big problem if we don't get something as Dave noted.
> > 
> > Would it make sense to include somewhere a sentence that says something
> > like
> > "It is recommended that one avoids an ambiguous separtor when
> > displaying addresses and port numbers together"?
> > 
> >> Personally, I'd rather see a recommendation that everything use
> >> the same separator whenever possible, rather than recommending 
> >> that everything use some separator that isn't ambiguous.
> > 
> >> Otherwise, you run into lots of conversion problems when you
> >> try to pass strings between different protocols/apps/
> >> management tools/etc.  Sometimes that's unavoidable, but
> >> the point of a recommendation is to avoid problems
> >> whenever you can.
> > 
> >> -Dave
> > 
> > 
> > Seiichi Kawamura
> - --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [email protected]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> - --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> - --
> ##########################################
> NEC BIGLOBE Ltd.
>    Platform Systems Division
>    Seiichi Kawamura <[email protected]>
>    TEL   : 03-3798-6085 (FAX: 03-3798-6029)
>    Mobile: 090-1547-4791
> ##########################################
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
> 
> iD8DBQFKDQUQcrhTYfxyMkIRAvquAJ9snCxByDQUqSTBgLA3HMwiVHw+wACfUZwi
> n9VCykOspbJsRJPcLucB8pY=
> =dVSw
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [email protected]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: [email protected]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to