JINMEI Tatuya / [EMAIL PROTECTED]@C#:H wrote: >1. I'm particularly interested in if this document updates Section 2.2 > of draft-ietf-ipv6-addr-arch-v4-00.txt.
It's meant to supersede what's currently there, one way or another. Ultimately, ipv6-addr-arch really ought to have a normative reference to ipaddr-text-rep, but is there an issue with them being at different stages of the standards track? Perhaps we can't do that on this iteration. In which order are ipv6-addr-arch-v4 and ipaddr-text-rep likely to be published as RFCs? If ipv6-addr-arch-v4 comes first, then ipaddr-text-rep should be noted as updating it. If the other way round, ipv6-addr-arch should either explicitly reference ipaddr-text-rep or copy the new, precise, text from ipaddr-text-rep section 3.2. (The ABNF could also be copied across, but it's not essential, and I'd like to avoid a proliferation of duplicates. The URI syntax document already has a duplicate of an earlier version of the ABNF, in order to avoid a publication dependency.) [more than four digits in a hex piece] > On the other hand, draft-main-ipaddr-text-rep makes it clear that > such a notation is invalid. I agree on this interpretation, though > this may be controversial as you can see in the thread above. I don't think it's at all controversial. Every source that has explicitly addressed this issue specifies a maximum of four digits (see ipaddr-text-rep section 2.2). This issue was raised on this mailing list last time ipaddr-text-rep was discussed, and there was an overwhelming consensus for a maximum of four digits. >2. draft-ietf-ipv6-scoping-arch-00.txt defines an extension of the > textual representation for IPv6 scoped addresses in order to > disambiguate the scope zone. I'm not sure if > draft-main-ipaddr-text-rep should be modified to support the > extension (my current impression is that it's too much), but we > probably need to clarify relationship between these two documents. The presentation format for unscoped addresses, specified in ipaddr-text-rep, forms part of the scoped address syntax. It's not necessary to put the scoped address syntax in the same document. There's a similar issue with the address prefix syntax; I considered including that in ipaddr-text-rep, but I think it's already adequately specified by section 2.3 of draft-ietf-ipv6-addr-arch-v4-00. Section 10 of draft-ietf-ipv6-scoping-arch-00 incorporates the IPv6 unscoped address syntax by reference, without specifying which document is to provide that syntax. It should probably have an explicit normative reference to ipaddr-text-rep. -zefram -- Andrew Main (Zefram) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
