On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 08:44:46PM +0200, Fred Baker wrote: > > On Aug 4, 2010, at 5:56 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 05:34:39PM +0200, Fred Baker wrote: > > > >> I think this is a mis-use of AUTH48; the working group has > >> considered the draft and said what it wanted to say, and at this > >> point the RFC Editor is asking you whether they changed the intent > >> of the draft in the editing process or whether perhaps your address > >> has changed. Changing the draft in a substantive way is out of scope > >> of the question you are being asked. > > > > So the idea is to publish the wording as is and once the RFC pops up > > we file an errata that clarifies that the sentence > > > > The use of symbol "::" MUST be used to its maximum capability. > > > > also implies that "::" MUST be used if there are at least two > > consecutive 16-bit 0 fields. Or can we compromise on a less heavy > > change, e.g. adding just before the quoted sentence. > > > > If at least two consecutive 16-bit 0 fields are present, the > > symbol "::" MUST be used. > > > So, 2001:0db8:0000:0000 : 0000:0300:0000:0000 > > could be encoded > > 2001:0db8::0300:: > > Because in both cases there are adjacent fields of 0000
You have to read the whole text of course. Nice try. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
