Subject: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5952 (4900)

From: RFC Errata System <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 03:20:00 -0800 (PST)

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5952,
"A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5952&eid=4900

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Michael Krzyzaniak <[email-masked]>

Section: 4.2.2.

Original Text
-------------
Handling One 16-Bit 0 Field

The symbol "::" MUST NOT be used to shorten just one 16-bit 0 field.
   For example, the representation 2001:db8:0:1:1:1:1:1 is correct, but
   2001:db8::1:1:1:1:1 is not correct.

Corrected Text
--------------
But Section 2.2.  Zero Compression
says:

'A special syntax is available to compress the zeros.  The use of
      "::" indicates one or more groups of 16 bits of zeros.'

   It is possible to select whether or not to omit just one 16-bit 0
   field.

      2001:db8:aaaa:bbbb:cccc:dddd::1

      2001:db8:aaaa:bbbb:cccc:dddd:0:1

Notes
-----
In 2.2 :: for only one 16-bit 0 filed :: is used
4.2.2 says MUST NOT -RFC 2119 says
2. MUST NOT   This phrase, or the phrase "SHALL NOT", mean that the
   definition is an absolute prohibition of the specification.

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC5952 (draft-ietf-6man-text-addr-representation-07)
--------------------------------------
Title               : A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation
Publication Date    : August 2010
Author(s)           : S. Kawamura, M. Kawashima
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : IPv6 Maintenance
Area                : Internet
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

---

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 12:33:14 +0100

Michael,

section 2 of RFC 5952 explains how the textual representation was
originally defined, section 3 explains why tighter rules are
desirable, and section 4 finally defines tight rules that lead to
predictable textual representations. It is thus not a bug that the
texts in the different sections are different and hence I think this
errata should be rejected.

/js

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 03:20:00AM -0800, RFC Errata System wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [email-masked]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
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/>