OK, we do disagree about that ;-)
On 2010-02-03 10:23, black_da...@emc.com wrote: > The concern is not whether it is required (MUST) vs. recommended > (SHOULD), but rather than the canonical form is not sufficiently > specified. Towards that end we disagree on the level of need for > pseudocode. > > Thanks, > --David > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: gen-art-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:gen-art-boun...@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Brian E Carpenter >> Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 3:27 PM >> To: Black, David >> Cc: 6man-cha...@tools.ietf.org; akawamu...@mesh.ad.jp; ipv6@ietf.org; > kawashi...@necat.nec.co.jp; >> i...@ietf.org; gen-...@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART reviewof > draft-ietf-6man-text-addr-representation-04 >> David, >> >> The problem is that we cannot make this a required format. Like it or >> not, there is a range of ways to represent an IPv6 address in text >> form, and has been for many years. 2001:DEAD:BEEF:: and > 2001:deAd:BEeF:: >> are the same address. >> >> The draft is very precise on this point: >> >> The >> recommendation in this document SHOULD be followed by systems when >> generating an address to represent as text, but all implementations >> MUST accept any legitimate [RFC4291] format. >> >> This is the only approach which is consistent with history. Making >> that SHOULD into a MUST would be simply unrealistic. But I really >> don't understand your objection to this as a standards track document. >> It's a complete, if simple, normative specification. (It could also >> have been a BCP, imho, but the WG preferred standards track.) >> >> I don't see any particular need to provide pseudocode; it wouldn't >> change the normative content. It certainly wouldn't do any harm. >> >> Regards >> Brian Carpenter >> >> On 2010-02-03 03:36, black_da...@emc.com wrote: >>> I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) >>> reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see >>> http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html). >>> >>> Please wait for direction from your document shepherd >>> or AD before posting a new version of the draft. >>> >>> Document: draft-ietf-6man-text-addr-representation-04 >>> Reviewer: David L. Black >>> Review Date: February 2, 2010 >>> IESG Telechat date: February 4, 2010 >>> >>> Summary: >>> This draft is on the right track, but has open issues, described >>> in the review. >>> >>> Comments: >>> The draft provides recommendations for a canonical format for IPv6 >>> addresses. >>> >>> The open issue is that the draft only provides recommendations, and >>> does not tightly specify a canonical format. A tight specification >>> of a canonical format would include at least one (and preferably >>> both) of: >>> - An algorithm to test whether an IPv6 text address >>> is in the canonical format >>> - An algorithm to convert an IPv6 text address into canonical >>> form. >>> Code or pseudo-code should be used, and note that the latter item >>> subsumes the former (a canonicalization algorithm makes no changes > to >>> input that's already in the canonical format). In the absence of >>> these elements, I'm not convinced that the draft defines an >>> interoperable standard that solves the problem. >>> >>> This document is a good start - I think it's a fine requirements >>> document that would be appropriate to publish as an Informational > RFC, >>> but I believe that more work is needed to produce a standards-track > RFC >>> that specifies an interoperable representation. If this document >>> is published in its current form, it should be edited slightly to >>> make it clear that it is only a requirements document. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> --David >>> ---------------------------------------------------- >>> David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer >>> EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA 01748 >>> +1 (508) 293-7953 FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786 >>> black_da...@emc.com Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754 >>> ---------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gen-art mailing list >>> gen-...@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gen-art mailing list >> gen-...@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
