Hi,
Yes, this seems like a very good clarification to make -- one of those
"obvious" things that could easily get different interpretations or just
lazy programming causing issues. At minimum should be clarified for
sipping-v6-transition. If that could be done in RFC process, then it
would obviously be better. Likely a correction would also be warranted in
base SIP; unsure.
And yes, those addresses are equivalent. Saying it is done "at binary
level" implies implementation, so I would not say that. Some words like
"expanded form" might be more appropriate. But the comparison needs to
account for all variations of notation on both IPv6 and IPv4 addresses
(there are lots more than noted below of course).
BTW, I notice this was not posted on SIPPING. Even though most of us
probably watch both, suggest it get put there also since it is the home of
sipping-v6 ... perhaps aft this mini-debate settles.
-- Peter
Gonzalo Camarillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21.11.07 04:17
To: sip <[email protected]>
cc: Brett Tate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Sip] URI comparison rules - IPv6 addresses
Hi,
Brett brought this up in the SIP Implementors mailing list. The
following IPv6 addresses are supposed to be equivalent:
[::ffff:192.0.2.128] and [::ffff:c000:280]
[2001:db8::9:1] and [2001:db8::9:01]
[0:0:0:0:0:FFFF:129.144.52.38] and [::FFFF:129.144.52.38]
Now, let's say I need to compare sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]::ffff:192.0.2.128] and
sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]::ffff:c000:280]. Should we consider these URIs to be
equivalent or not?
My proposal is that we clarify that IPv6 address comparison happens at
the binary level, not at the textual level. We could log a bug against
RFC3261, and try and add such a clarification to the IPv6 transition
document (I will need to ask the ADs whether or not we can add this in
AUTH48).
Cheers,
Gonzalo
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
