- From: Josh Cohen <joshco@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 13:00:08 -0800
- To: "'koen@win.tue.nl'" <koen@win.tue.nl>, mogul@pa.dec.com
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Ill also add this to the http-ext issues for the extensions documents.. -- Josh Cohen <joshco@microsoft.com> Program Manager - Internet Technologies > -----Original Message----- > From: koen@win.tue.nl [mailto:koen@win.tue.nl] > Sent: Monday, January 12, 1998 12:52 PM > To: mogul@pa.dec.com > Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com > Subject: Re: Heads-up re: IPv6 addresses in URLs (from IPng-WG minutes) > > > Jeffrey Mogul: > > > >I was skimming the minutes of the IPng WG from the Washington, DC IETF > >meeting, and found this: > > > >[Start of excerpt] > [...deleted...] > > changed it is very likely to be sufficient. Recommend that the > > primary preferred syntax for IPv6 addresses in URL's be: > > > > http://[ABCD.EF01::2345:6789]:80/ > > > > The IPv6 address should be enclosed in brackets. URL parsers that > > can not support this notation can either support the proposed > > alternative syntax: > > > > http://--ABCD-EF12-192.100.1.2.ipv6:80/ > > > > or not allow IPv6 addresses to be entered directly. > > > >[End of excerpt] > > > >I'm not sure if this is really an "issue" for HTTP/1.1, but I suspect > >that the IESG will want to be sure that HTTP/1.1 syntax is compatible > >with IPv6, and if there are conflicts, we should probably make sure > >they are addressed. Or make an explicit statement that we are not > >going to address them in this version of the protocol (and why not). > > I remember that we had a discussion about ipv6 urls some time ago on > www-talk, see for example the thread starting with > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-talk/1996JulAug/0093.html It was noted in that thread that [ and ] were illegal in URLs. We did not really reach a consensus, but one intermediate conclusion was that a notation like http://1080::8:800:200C:417A.8000/blah with the . separating the address from the port number, would do the trick. I see however that you quoted some ipv6 addresses which have a . in them above, I think we assumed at the time that the ipv6 notation would use : only. Anyway, this is probably an issue between the ipv6 people and whoever feels responsible for maintaining URLs (Larry(?)). I am just providing some pointers. I think we should at least add a note to the 1.1 spec to warn implementers of this issue. >-Jeff Koen.
Received on Monday, 12 January 1998 13:03:51 UTC