Send Netdot-users mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://osl.uoregon.edu/mailman/listinfo/netdot-users
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Netdot-users digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: IPv6 formatting and RFC 5952 (Matt Zagrabelny)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 14:38:58 -0600
From: Matt Zagrabelny <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Netdot-users] IPv6 formatting and RFC 5952
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Message-ID:
<caolfk3whhn+5qkdkrz5iqbyboj3wpu5-nqsofeni0ey5jfy...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Ping?
No opinions out there?
-m
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Matt Zagrabelny <[email protected]> wrote:
> Greetings Carlos and others,
>
> What are folks' opinions on IPv6 address formatting within Netdot?
>
> There are a variety of places where v6 address and netmasks appear. Do
> we want to take a strict adherence to RFC 5952 recommendations?
>
> There are a few places where there are inconsistencies. I'm willing to
> help code up the fixes, but it would be nice to have some dialog
> and/or consensus regarding our options.
>
> A few of the places that IPv6 address and netmasks are showing up:
>
> management/ip.html page
>
> Netmask: FFFF:FFFF:FF00:0:0:0:0:0
> Usable Addresses: 309485009821345068724781056 (2607:EA00:200:0:0:0:0:0
> - 2607:EA00:2FF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF)
> Address: 2607:ea00:200::/40
>
> Should we include a configuration option such as:
>
> IPV6_FORMAT_CASENESS => 'upper'
>
> and allow the admin to set that formatting parameter? or just force
> lowercase as is described in RFC 5952?
>
> The addresses in the "Usable Addresses" field do not conform to the
> RFC. Should we fix that?
>
> The netmask field also does not conform to the RFC. Does the RFC apply
> to netmasks? This is more of a consistency point than anything else,
> but if we are going to make changes then perhaps talking about it now
> is appropriate.
>
> Feedback appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -m
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Netdot-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://osl.uoregon.edu/mailman/listinfo/netdot-users
End of Netdot-users Digest, Vol 93, Issue 4
*******************************************
