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

["Peter Barany" <[e-mail]>]

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:[e-mail]]
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