So since there isn't a standard, calling it a string seems like the closest
we can get, at least for IPv4. For v6, there might be an ABNF grammar
available to cite or reference.
RFC 3986, which is about URI syntax, has ABNF for v4 and v6 addresses.
RFC 3261, which is about SIP, includes ABNF for IPv6address which is
pretty loose. And it's wrong, with a correction in RFC 5952 which says to
use the syntax in 3986.
None of this is useful for aggregate reports because the XML schema
language uses regular expressions, not ABNF. The correct ABNF for IPv6
addresses is quite ugly and I would not want to try to turn it into a
regex and hope it's correct:
IPv6address = 6( h16 ":" ) ls32
/ "::" 5( h16 ":" ) ls32
/ [ h16 ] "::" 4( h16 ":" ) ls32
/ [ *1( h16 ":" ) h16 ] "::" 3( h16 ":" ) ls32
/ [ *2( h16 ":" ) h16 ] "::" 2( h16 ":" ) ls32
/ [ *3( h16 ":" ) h16 ] "::" h16 ":" ls32
/ [ *4( h16 ":" ) h16 ] "::" ls32
/ [ *5( h16 ":" ) h16 ] "::" h16
/ [ *6( h16 ":" ) h16 ] "::"
ls32 = ( h16 ":" h16 ) / IPv4address
; least-significant 32 bits of address
h16 = 1*4HEXDIG
; 16 bits of address represented in hexadecimal
FWIW, it also has the IPv4 ABNF:
IPv4address = dec-octet "." dec-octet "." dec-octet "." dec-octet
dec-octet = DIGIT ; 0-9
/ %x31-39 DIGIT ; 10-99
/ "1" 2DIGIT ; 100-199
/ "2" %x30-34 DIGIT ; 200-249
/ "25" %x30-35 ; 250-255
That's also not useful, same reason.
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list -- dmarc@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to dmarc-le...@ietf.org
