Re: [apps-discuss] draft-kerwin-file-scheme and hosts

[Bjoern Hoehrmann <[e-mail]>]

* Sam Ruby wrote:
>On 01/10/2015 03:40 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
>> * Matthew Kerwin wrote:
>>> On 20 December 2014 at 10:45, Sam Ruby <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>>> file://[2001::1]/foo
>>>
>>> I thought this already worked with RFC 3986..? See the "IP-literal"
>>> construct in <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-3.2.2>, which is
>>> used in "host".
>
>My point was that it works with RFC 3986, but doesn't work with 
>draft-kerwin-file-scheme.  I encourage you to look at section 2.2 of RFC 
>4291.
>
>There is a very simple fix for this.  I believe that what you want to 
>refer to instead is section 2 of RFC 6874.

Per https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kerwin-file-scheme-13 the string
parses as

  ["file-URI", [
    ["f-scheme", [], 0, 4],
    ["f-hier-part", [
      ["auth-path", [
        ["f-auth", [
          ["host", [
            ["IP-literal", [
              ["IPv6address", [
                ["h16", [
                  ["HEXDIG", [
                    ["DIGIT", [], 8, 9]], 8, 9],
                  ["HEXDIG", [
                    ["DIGIT", [], 9, 10]], 9, 10],
                  ["HEXDIG", [
                    ["DIGIT", [], 10, 11]], 10, 11],
                  ["HEXDIG", [
                    ["DIGIT", [], 11, 12]], 11, 12]], 8, 12],
                ["h16", [
                  ["HEXDIG", [
                    ["DIGIT", [], 14, 15]], 14, 15]], 14, 15]], 8, 15]],
7, 16]], 7, 16]], 7, 16],
        ["path-absolute", [
          ["segment-nz", [
            ["pchar", [
              ["unreserved", [
                ["ALPHA", [], 17, 18]], 17, 18]], 17, 18],
            ["pchar", [
              ["unreserved", [
                ["ALPHA", [], 18, 19]], 18, 19]], 18, 19],
            ["pchar", [
              ["unreserved", [
                ["ALPHA", [], 19, 20]], 19, 20]], 19, 20]], 17, 20]],
                  16, 20]], 7, 20]], 5, 20]], 0, 20]

where `host` comes from RFC 3986. I do not see anything in the draft
calling for a different interpretation of `IPv6address` than what RFC
3986 calls for, so I am not sure what does not work here.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:[e-mail] · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
D-10243 Berlin · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
 Available for hire in Berlin (early 2015)  · http://www.websitedev.de/