On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:54:26 -0400,
Margaret Wasserman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I don't know. A year ago, I would have said no, but with
documents on the IESG agenda like draft-black-snmp-uri-08.txt, I am
taking a new view of URIs. This document defines a URI syntax that
can be used
Margaret Wasserman wrote:
I don't know. A year ago, I would have said no, but with documents
on the IESG agenda like draft-black-snmp-uri-08.txt, I am taking a new
view of URIs. This document defines a URI syntax that can be used for
access to SNMP objects, and one of the use cases includes
De: Pekka Savola [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fecha: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 09:14:50 +0300 (EEST)
Para: Margaret Wasserman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: RFC 2732 and Zone IDs
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004, Margaret Wasserman wrote:
We're having a discussion on URIs
We discussed this with respect to the scoped address document a
while back (message attached below).
Here's my view (clipped from some off-line dialogue) about why we
didn't go into panic mode to get this fixed in the URI syntax
(2396bis, already approved as full Standard, which obsoletes 2732)
at
Hi All,
We're having a discussion on URIs and IRIs in the IESG that has led
me to realize that the URL literal IPv6 address format described in
RFC 2732 does not contain any provision for including a zone ID. I
don't think that we could simply add a %zone-id to the end of the
IP address,
:26:48 -0400
Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: RFC 2732 and Zone IDs
Hi All,
We're having a discussion on URIs and IRIs in the IESG that has led
me to realize that the URL literal IPv6 address format described in
RFC 2732 does not contain any provision for including a zone ID. I
don't think
