> What about the generic equivalence between :: and > the zeros that it elides?
As Vijay mentioned, enhancements concerning IPv6 (and IPv4) address equivalency will be added within the next version of the draft. The initial focus will likely be on the impacts of the variations presented within rfc4291 sections 2.2 and 2.5.5. The variations presented within section 2.2 (such as your question) should be considered equivalent from a SIP perspective. However concerning things like To/From sip-uri's host, I assume that there will currently be poor interoperability if devices adjust things per section 2.2's flexibility (beyond hex case) within a transaction or dialog. I haven't received any feedback concerning impacts of section 2.5.5. However I assume that they should not be considered equivalent to their IPv4 addresses from a SIP perspective. And other IPv6 addresses are also not equivalent to their IPv4 counterpart; for instance "::1" does not equal "127.0.0.1". For prior threads... the following were my initial questions posted to sip-implementors. The first reflects questions related to rfc4291 section 2.2. The second reflects questions related to section 2.5.5. https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/sip-implementors/2007-October/01 7678.html https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/sip-implementors/2007-October/01 7692.html _______________________________________________ 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
