Re: Finally time for IPvn support

2004-10-05 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Mon, 04 Oct 2004 15:33:46 -0700, Lev Walkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: vlm Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: [...] vlm So, I'm looking for proposals on a new syntax to separate IP address vlm from port number. Any suggestion? vlm vlm This is how Cisco does

Re: Finally time for IPvn support

2004-10-05 Thread Howard Chu
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Mon, 04 Oct 2004 15:33:46 -0700, Lev Walkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: vlm Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: [...] vlm So, I'm looking for proposals on a new syntax to separate IP address vlm from port number. Any suggestion?

Re: Finally time for IPvn support

2004-10-05 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tue, 05 Oct 2004 02:41:24 -0700, Howard Chu [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: hyc The Cisco solution *is* the standard solution: hyc http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2732.txt hyc hyc It would be best to avoid any non-standard formats... Thanks! Decision made (and I'll extend

Re: Finally time for IPvn support

2004-10-05 Thread Gianni Mariani
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: hyc It would be best to avoid any non-standard formats... Thanks! Decision made (and I'll extend it a bit to allow [ and ] around IPv4 addresses and host names as well, mostly because I'm lazy). If I think hard enough, I could probably think of ways that

Re: Finally time for IPvn support

2004-10-05 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tue, 05 Oct 2004 06:31:43 -0700, Gianni Mariani [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: gianni Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: gianni gianni hyc It would be best to avoid any non-standard formats... gianni gianni Thanks! Decision made (and I'll extend it a bit to allow [

Re: Finally time for IPvn support

2004-10-05 Thread Jeffrey Altman
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: gianni If I think hard enough, I could probably think of ways that gianni this would break things. Well, let's see, we have two places where this is relevant. One is the simple {host}:{port} combination, the other is the URL http://{host}:{port}/... In both

Re: Finally time for IPvn support

2004-10-05 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tue, 05 Oct 2004 11:41:48 -0400, Jeffrey Altman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: jaltman Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: jaltman jaltman gianni If I think hard enough, I could probably think of ways that jaltman gianni this would break things. jaltman jaltman

Finally time for IPvn support

2004-10-04 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
Hi, I've just been hacking around a little bit to add IPv6 capability, and I thought of syntax for host and port specifications. As it is now, the syntax used a little everywhere in OpenSSL is {host}:{port}. Unfortunately, if we're to support IPv6 numeric addresses, I find myself in a little

Re: Finally time for IPvn support

2004-10-04 Thread Lev Walkin
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: Hi, I've just been hacking around a little bit to add IPv6 capability, and I thought of syntax for host and port specifications. As it is now, the syntax used a little everywhere in OpenSSL is {host}:{port}. Unfortunately, if we're to support IPv6 numeric

Re: Finally time for IPvn support

2004-10-04 Thread Howard Chu
Lev Walkin wrote: Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: Hi, I've just been hacking around a little bit to add IPv6 capability, and I thought of syntax for host and port specifications. As it is now, the syntax used a little everywhere in OpenSSL is {host}:{port}. Unfortunately, if we're to support