On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 12:06:44AM +0100, ?????????? ???????????????? wrote:
 
> > However, there may be
> > situations where hexadecimal representation is chosen to meet certain
> > needs.  Addressing those needs is out of the scope of this document.
> 
> It's rather vague, and I think the recently added Section 3.2.5 offers an  
> example that's close having such needs. If for some reason a textual  
> comparison of addresses is done in the course of a protocol (don't know  
> how likely it is, but can certainly happen), a strictly canonical format  
> is required, and Section 5 currently gives some leeway in this matter  
> (since different systems may have different knowledge about existing  
> address types). Perhaps, especially since this is a standards track  
> document now, such a strict format should be specified, to save protocol  
> developers the trouble of doing it themselves.
>
> I think that for such a "really canonical" representation, we can just  
> forbid using the mixed notation. The reasons for this are that it's the  
> simplest definition, the easiest to implement and doesn't single out any  
> particular transition technologies. An alternative would be to mandate  
> mixed notation for IPv4-mapped and IPv4-compatible addresses and  
> hexadecimal representation for everything else, for compatibility with  
> current implementations of inet_ntop. However, I don't think that such  
> compatibility matters much, because there are no consistency requirements  
> for inet_ntop and to ensure canonicity developers will be required to  
> implement their own functions, anyway.

For what its worth, draft-ietf-netmod-yang-types-04.txt only uses the
hexadecimal format for the ipv6-address data type. This simplifies
things since all IPv6 addresses have the same format - and it does not
matter how an address was generated when it comes to questions such as
ordering of addresses. I would prefer if the wording in this document
allows for the single representation approach taken in the above
mentioned document.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to