Brian Carpenter writes:
> On 09/08/2012 22:31, Stuart Cheshire wrote:
> > At the meeting in Vancouver, Dave Thaler made a point that I found
> > convincing:
> >
> > Where is the character set for IPv6 zone IDs specified?
>
> RFC 4007 doesn't do so, but can be read to imply ASCII.

How?  RFC 4007 says:
> An implementation MAY support other kinds of non-null strings as
> <zone_id>.  However, the strings must not conflict with the delimiter
> character.  The precise format and semantics of additional strings is
> implementation dependent.

So it's completely implementation dependent, the only restriction being
that % and null are disallowed.

> draft-ietf-6man-uri-zoneid-02 is explicit that it refers to
> the URI character set, which is ASCII:
>
>    A <zone_id> SHOULD contain only ASCII characters classified
>    in RFC 3986 as "unreserved".
>
> But it allows percent encoding in a URI, which is necessary because of
> the SHOULD:
>
>    ZoneID = 1*( unreserved / pct-encoded )

ZoneID needs to allow (including via percent-encoding) the same characters
as are allowed in <zone_id> in RFC 4007.  For example the ']'
character would be legal in RFC 4007 but would have to be percent
encoded in a URI.

> > If we accept
> > that future interface names might include non-roman characters, then we
> > have to assume that to allow safe unambiguous use in URIs, interface
> > names have to undergo escaping.
>
> If we want to internationalise the ZoneID, that would be a whole
> other discussion.

It's already allowed by RFC 4007 as far as I know.

Stuart's email is an accurate summary of my position.

-Dave

> > And if the interface name itself is going to be escaped using URI "%xx"
> > notation, then why not escape the '%' the same way?
>
> My impression is that this WG has already objected to that, which is why
> we ended up with the current proposal. I leave the next step to the WG Chair.
>
>    Brian
>
> > This argues in support of what Microsoft already did: Encode '%' as "%25".
> >
> > It's not my favourite outcome, but based on Dave Thaler's comment, it's
> > the one that gets my vote.
> >
> > In the spirit of "be liberal with what you accept" the doc should also
> > advocate that URI parsers are forgiving about accepting bare '%' signs
> > -- i.e. a '%' not followed by two valid hex characters is left
> > untouched. This lets a human user copy-and-paste "fe80::a%en1" from a
> > "ping" command and have it work, though the strictly correct form (which
> > URI generators should output) remains "fe80::a%25en1".
> >
> > Stuart Cheshire
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to