IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Next steps for rfc6874bis

Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-7@u-1.phicoh.com> Tue, 17 August 2021 10:31 UTC

Return-Path: <pch-b9D3CB0F5@u-1.phicoh.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 596AC3A1F4E for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 03:31:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.498
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.498 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.399, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FlSNiOcYjZyJ for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 03:31:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (stereo6.hq.phicoh.net [IPv6:2001:981:201c:1:2a0:c9ff:fe9f:17a9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A21ED3A1F4A for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 03:30:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (localhost [::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by stereo.hq.phicoh.net with esmtp (TLS version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305) (Smail #158) id m1mFwMx-0000IdC; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 12:30:55 +0200
Message-Id: <m1mFwMx-0000IdC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Next steps for rfc6874bis
From: Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-7@u-1.phicoh.com>
Sender: pch-b9D3CB0F5@u-1.phicoh.com
References: <667b9ebb-3c99-8c5b-fa57-796e5bb84b4c@gmail.com> <3269d750-2e97-9bb2-550a-94b652d689a4@foobar.org> <1ea4c0e5-fd7c-c39a-28a6-681f6c40af8c@gmail.com> <27470.1628692112@localhost> <m1mFccG-0000I3C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <20210816134703.meb4pfloazkco22n@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <m1mFdCV-0000HvC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <e1dd5e83-31d2-8b8b-2608-309f8d8d9cd0@foobar.org> <m1mFfMh-0000JWC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <29350bb2-a132-2196-c68e-e8d3614ecff8@gmail.com> <m1mFvPJ-0000JPC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CANMZLAbhWbuEBRM63kQ_5=8Bz8cu_WzZ6kUV=9-TydzYgXSuOw@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 17 Aug 2021 21:36:23 +1200 ." <CANMZLAbhWbuEBRM63kQ_5=8Bz8cu_WzZ6kUV=9-TydzYgXSuOw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 12:30:54 +0200
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/-Wr4OnJDbx7l7UTudExDF24y4fA>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 10:31:04 -0000

>Andrew offered ABNF to back up his assertion, I can't point to it from my
>phone but you'll find it upthread somewhere. Whether real world parsers can
>respect it is a question for the parser authors.

If I got it correct he is basically saying that RFC 3986 is wrong. 
>From https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/ocNXw2Tl7YnOXOVjnUJ_VS7PI88/
"That is a bug.  The '%' must be treated as the syntactic delimiter it is.

If RFC 3986 is wrong, then that must be updated. I don't know how tricky
that will be, it is an old RFC and the original RFC 1738 dates from 1994
and also has text that '%' needs to be encoded.

I'm curious how they want to update RFC 3986.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email