Subject: Where is IPv6 in SIP?

From: "Doug Sauder" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 08:23:37 -0500

Will there be any changes in SIP to provide better support for IPv6?  Specifically, will the "host" element eventually allow IPv6 addresses?

For example:

   Via: SIP/2.0/UDP ::193.168.2.39:9000
   Via: SIP/2.0/UDP ::C1A8:228:9000

or something similar?  (I'm not sure about using a colon to separate address and port.)

Doug Sauder
Broadsoft, Inc.

---

From: Kim Liu <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 10:21:05 -0500

> or something similar?  (I'm not sure about using a colon to separate address and port.)

This came up as a general URL format issue in a W3.org mailing list 
for specifying ports and IPv6 addresses in URLs in general.  If you
go to the www.w3.org site and search the mailing lists for IPv6, it
will probably turn up the discussion.  I do not rememebr if there was
an official resolution to the matter, but the final discussion leaned
towards using an extra '.' to separate the port in the IPv6 address.

For example:
  IPv6 ::193.168.2.39.9000
  IPv6 ::C1A8:0228.9000

The representation is non-ambiguous (i.e. you are either going to see
one '.' (a port), three (an IPv4 address), or 4 (IPv4 address plus 
port) and does not add any more special characters to parsing.  It 
would probably be best to see if this did get addressed in a general
manner in URL/URI formatting/specifications.

Reference (look in document for the 'URL parsing and IPV6' thread)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-talk/threads.html#02788

Cheers,
Kim Liu
[email-masked]

---

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 10:37:37 -0500

We very much wanted to support it in rfc2543, but the problem was that
there was no support for IPv6 in the general URL syntax (rfc2396). A
document was, and still is, moving through the IETF to standardize a
format for IPv6 literals in URLs. If you're interested, its:

http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipngwg-url-literal-04.txt

> towards using an extra '.' to separate the port in the IPv6 address.

interestingly, this differs from how its done in the above draft, which
uses a [] to enclose the v6 address. So, it would be:

sip:[::193.168.2.39]:9000

I personally don't care, and its not an issue we should debate here.
Whatever it is, once this is standardized, we can use it, and then
support v6 in the next revision of SIP.

-Jonathan R.

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg                       200 Executive Drive
Chief Scientist                             Suite 120 
dynamicsoft                                 West Orange, NJ 07052
[email-masked]                     FAX:   (732) 741-4778
http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~jdrosen         PHONE: (732) 741-7244
http://www.dynamicsoft.com