Subject: RE: [AVT] RTP: IPv6 examples for RTCP SDES CNAME

From: "Peter Barany" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 09:11:06 -0600

Hi Stephen,

FYI. The IPv6 address that I used in the suggested text that I sent to the
IETF AVT WG reflector can also be found in an example in RFC 3266 "Support
for IPv6 in Session Description Protocol (SDP)" (see Section 4 of RFC 3266).
Don't know if this addresses your concern or not. Thanks.

Regards,

Pete

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Casner [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 6:19 PM
To: AVT WG
Subject: [AVT] RTP: IPv6 examples for RTCP SDES CNAME

At the suggestion of Peter Barany, I added explanation and examples of
IPv6 address formats to the IPv4 cases that were already there for the
format of the RTCP SDES CNAME item.  I expect these are not
controversial.  Is this IPv6 address officially designated for use in
document examples as 192.0.2.0/24 is for IPv4?  Use of a real address
is generally not advised.

                                                        -- Steve

   For example, the standard ASCII
   representation of an IP Version 4 address is "dotted decimal", also
   known as dotted quad, and for IP Version 6, addresses are textually
   represented as eight groups of four hexadecimal digits separated by
   colons.  ...

   Examples are "[email-masked]", "[email-masked]" or
   "doe@2201:056D::112E:144A:1E24" for a multi-user system.  On a system
   with no user name, examples would be "sleepy.megacorp.com",
   "192.0.2.89" or "2201:056D::112E:144A:1E24".

_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt

---

From: "Peter Barany" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 08:50:37 -0600

Stephen,

I agree. But as I mentioned, RFC 2373 has been replaced/updated by the Draft
Standard "draft-ietf-ipngwg-addr-arch-v3-11.txt" (approved for publication
on Oct. 29, 2002). Don't know the RFC #. We probably should reference the
Draft Standard if possible. Thanks.

Regards,

Pete

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Casner [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 10:35 PM
To: Barany, Peter [RICH1:2H16:EXCH]
Cc: AVT WG
Subject: RE: [AVT] RTP: IPv6 examples for RTCP SDES CNAME

On Wed, 8 Jan 2003, Peter Barany wrote:

> Regarding ::10.0.0.1, I believe this is a valid representation of an IPv4
> compatible address. However, let me take another stab at amending the text
> below to account for this an additional rules (e.g.., there are 3 forms
for
> representing IPv6 addresses as text strings). Another way around this
would
> be to refer to the appropriate IETF IPv6 WG document in order to account
for
> all of the variations/rules. What do you think? NOTE: RFC 2373 (which is a
> Proposed Standard) has been advanced to Draft Standard
> (draft-ietf-ipngwg-addr-arch-v3-11.txt), approved for publication on Oct.
> 29, 2002 (RFC #?).

Peter,

Thanks for the expanded text, but I think we don't want to go into
that much detail here.  Your alternate suggestion is better.  I
suggest the following:

   For example, the standard ASCII representation of an IP Version 4
   address is "dotted decimal", also known as dotted quad, and for IP
   Version 6, addresses are textually represented as groups of
   hexadecimal digits separated by colons (with variations as detailed
   in RFC 2373).

                                                        -- Steve