On 01/08/2012 18:16, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 09:42:44AM -0700, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote:
>> Wouldn't it be an option to have all applications & systems accept
>> as input both formats, but only give as output the new one?
>> i.e. browsers already rewrite URIs.
>
> There are other standards that currently state that % is the canonical
> format for zone identifier separation. We would have to revise those
> standards (and all standards using those standards) and for some of
> them this is not just a simple update due to the way versioning works.
> As such, a new '-' notation won't be accepted by certain interfaces
> for a long time. In other words, we cause problems (perhaps for 10-20
> years) where there are currently no problems. And the question is
> whether this price is justified to address the zone identifier in URI
> issue.
>
> For me, the priority is this:
>
> a) Check seriously whether %en1 is really not acceptable since there
> really is no ambiguity. Using this notation is what the user wants.
Of course we have done that, twice (a few years ago and this year).
Dead end.
>
> b) If a) is indeed not possible, simply apply the URI escaping rules,
> that is %25en1. This is consistent with URI escaping (which might
> happen on other parts of the zone index as well). Provide advise that
> URI parser implementors may accept %en1 (when it is unambiguous) and
> turn it into %25en1. (Many browsers already do this kind of thing
> today for other characters that need escaping.)
This, to my understanding, was already rejected by 6man some months ago,
with the conclusion that a new separator is needed. It's not my job
to make the consensus call, however.
>
> I see no value in introducing a new separator.
The value is providing a long-term path to cut and paste. Otherwise,
I assume we would indeed choose the %25 approach.
Brian
>
> /js
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
