Subject: IESG comments on draft-ietf-ipngwg-addr-arch-v3-09.txt

From: Thomas Narten <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 12:36:28 -0400

Good news. The IESG discussion of this document raised no major
issues. One point that was discussed, however, was related to whether
:: means "1 or more" occurances of zero vs. "2 or more", when used in
an IPv6 literal address. The document currently says:

>    2. Due to some methods of allocating certain styles of IPv6
>       addresses, it will be common for addresses to contain long strings
>       of zero bits.  In order to make writing addresses containing zero
>       bits easier a special syntax is available to compress the zeros.
>       The use of "::" indicates multiple groups of 16 bits of zeros.
>       The "::" can only appear once in an address.  The "::" can also be
>       used to compress the leading and/or trailing zeros in an address.

It turns out that an unscientific survey (one AD who got bitten once
and recalled not understanding what was wrong with the address being
typed in and another that then checked their implementation) at least
two implementation happen to implement this differently. I.e., on one
parser an address with :: denoting one occurance of zeros was
accepted, on the other it was rejected.

It would be good for the WG to clarify what meaning should be
implemented, and then clarify the document. Once that is  done, I
expect the IESG to approve the document.

Some other nits to fold in:

> Minor nit. The first reference to EUI-64 should contain a reference.

> 	this document does not say anywhere that it obsoletes 
> 	RFC 2373 - nor does the protocol action

Thomas
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 22:28:11 +0200

In your previous mail you wrote:

   One point that was discussed, however, was related to whether
   :: means "1 or more" occurances of zero vs. "2 or more", when used in
   an IPv6 literal address.

=> I always interpreted this as "one or more" (i.e., the standard "+").

   I.e., on one parser an address with :: denoting one occurance of zeros was
   accepted, on the other it was rejected.
   
=> the first is right, the second is wrong and must be fixed.

Thanks

[email-masked]

---

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 14:46:44 -0700

To resolve this issue, I propose the following text for section 2.2 
(changed line indicated by "|" ):

     The use of "::" indicates one or more groups of 16 bits of zeros.     |

Unless there is an objection, I will submit a new draft tomorrow with this 
change (as well as the reference and obsoletes RFC2373 changes).

Bob