Re: 6MAN WG [second] Last Call: draft-ietf-6man-uri-zoneid-01.txt

t.petch <ietfc@btconnect.com> Wed, 18 July 2012 08:33 UTC

Return-Path: <ietfc@btconnect.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 5213E21F8617 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 01:33:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.712
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.712 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.113, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vfYehE7vrFDp for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 01:33:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from va3outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (va3ehsobe002.messaging.microsoft.com [216.32.180.12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E640F21F8604 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 01:33:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail208-va3-R.bigfish.com (10.7.14.245) by VA3EHSOBE005.bigfish.com (10.7.40.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.23; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 08:34:29 +0000
Received: from mail208-va3 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail208-va3-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3D2B7802C5; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 08:34:28 +0000 (UTC)
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:157.55.224.141; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:DB3PRD0702HT006.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; RD:none; EFVD:NLI
X-SpamScore: -35
X-BigFish: PS-35(zz98dI9371Ic89bh936eI1b0bM542M1432Izz1202hzz1033IL8275bh8275dh186Mz2dh2a8h5a9h668h839h93fhd24hf0ah107ah304l)
Received: from mail208-va3 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail208-va3 (MessageSwitch) id 1342600466326390_25402; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 08:34:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from VA3EHSMHS023.bigfish.com (unknown [10.7.14.250]) by mail208-va3.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49455720046; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 08:34:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from DB3PRD0702HT006.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (157.55.224.141) by VA3EHSMHS023.bigfish.com (10.7.99.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.225.23; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 08:34:26 +0000
Received: from BY2PRD0310HT003.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (157.56.236.5) by pod51017.outlook.com (10.3.4.165) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.15.86.1; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 08:34:13 +0000
Message-ID: <00cd01cd64bf$8d6eea80$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
From: t.petch <ietfc@btconnect.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
References: <4CD4908C-3524-45BC-BA6F-1A595E91FFD9@employees.org><9B57C850BB53634CACEC56EF4853FF653B68F527@TK5EX14MBXW604.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com><4FF6E199.5020007@gmail.com><F9D7BDB7-D90F-4FCB-A31F-6BD9F359641D@gmail.com> <4FF718C7.5060206@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 6MAN WG [second] Last Call: draft-ietf-6man-uri-zoneid-01.txt
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 09:30:01 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Originating-IP: [157.56.236.5]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-OriginatorOrg: btconnect.com
Cc: 6man-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-6man-uri-zoneid@tools.ietf.org, ipv6@ietf.org, Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 08:33:41 -0000

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
To: "Bob Hinden" <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Cc: <6man-chairs@tools.ietf.org>rg>;
<draft-ietf-6man-uri-zoneid@tools.ietf.org>rg>; <ipv6@ietf.org>rg>; "Dave
Thaler" <dthaler@microsoft.com>
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 5:56 PM
Subject: Re: 6MAN WG [second] Last Call:
draft-ietf-6man-uri-zoneid-01.txt


> I'd be happy with that, or a small appendix. Dave, is it documented
anywhere?
>

Non-normative Appendix, Please.

Tom Petch

> Regards
>    Brian
>
> On 2012-07-06 15:00, Bob Hinden wrote:
> > With my co-author hat on, would it help to include a description of
what IE supports in Section 3. Web Browsers?
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >
> > On Jul 6, 2012, at 6:01 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> >
> >> Dave,
> >>
> >> 1) FYI, the deadline we gave the URI list to comment on this has
just
> >> passed, with only one (positive) reply.
> >>
> >> 2) It's for the WG Chairs to say if they want another version
> >> in view of your comments.
> >>
> >> 3) I don't see how the % format is currently legal. There's
> >> no provision for any characters after the IPv6 address, whether
> >> percent-encoded or not. We heard of browsers that previously
> >> allowed full RFC 4007 syntax (% *not* treated as an escape)
> >> but this is the first I've heard of IE allowing a zone index
> >> at all.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>   Brian
> >>
> >> On 2012-07-06 02:28, Dave Thaler wrote:
> >>> I know it's after the designated end of WGLC, but here's my
feedback...
> >>>
> >>> The document appears to call out existing practice in several
places, such as in section 1:
> >>>>  Some versions of some browsers accept the RFC 4007 syntax for
scoped
> >>>>  IPv6 addresses embedded in URIs, i.e., they have been coded to
> >>>>  interpret the "%" sign according to RFC 4007 instead of RFC
3986.
> >>> and in Appendix A point 1:
> >>>> Advantage: works today.
> >>> However, it's missing discussion of other alternatives already in
common practice.
> >>> For example alternative 3 (escaping the escape character as
allowed by RFC 3986) has:
> >>>>      Advantage: allows use of browser.
> >>>>
> >>>>      Disadvantage: ugly and confusing, doesn't allow simple cut
and
> >>>>      paste.
> >>> The disadvantage is certainly true.  However the main advantage
are notably
> >>> lacking, which is that it's already in common practice in many
places (to the extent
> >>> that using a zone id at all is common practice anyway).
> >>>
> >>> You'll see at
> >>>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa385325(v=vs.85
).aspx
> >>> that alternative 3 is what is supported in IE7 and above, and the
APIs are generally
> >>> available to Windows applications (i.e. not just IE7).
> >>>
> >>> The document does not state whether the existing legal use is
suddenly
> >>> declared to be illegal, or just another legal way of doing the
same thing.
> >>>
> >>> If you're telling existing applications and OS's that use
alternative 3 that they
> >>> have to change, that doesn't sound like a good thing.   That's
because many apps
> >>> want to be OS-version-independent and use URI parsing libraries
provided by
> >>> the OS.   We don't want apps to code their own URI parsing (it's
very easy to
> >>> get wrong, especially when you add various internationalization
issues).
> >>> As a result, apps will tend to code to the lowest common
denominator of
> >>> OS's they want to work on.    That means I expect to see apps
coding to
> >>> alternative 3 for the foreseeable future.   When they don't use
them in
> >>> edit boxes, the disadvantage of not being able to cut and paste is
not a
> >>> real disadvantage.
> >>>
> >>> Personally I don't have an issue with allowing both formats if the
WG feels
> >>> strongly that a cut-and-paste-friendly format is needed in
addition to
> >>> what's existing practice, though having two does affect the rules
for
> >>> comparison (see draft-iab-identifier-comparison section 3.1.2) but
not
> >>> noticeably.
> >>>
> >>> Finally, the stated disadvantage of alternative 3 is only a
disadvantage if the
> >>> specified scheme in section 2 *does* allow cut-and-paste.   For
that to
> >>> happen, it means the zone id separator has to work outside the
context of
> >>> URIs.   That is, section 2 says:
> >>>>  Thus, the scoped address fe80::a%en1 would appear in a URI as
> >>>>  http://[fe80::a-en1].
> >>> To support cut-and-paste, that means that
> >>> "ping fe80::a-en1"
> >>> needs to work.   But this document is titled
> >>> " Representing IPv6 Zone Identifiers in Uniform Resource
Identifiers"
> >>> and similarly the abstract limits its scope to URIs.
> >>>
> >>> Hence section 2 is in contradiction with the analysis of
alternative 3.
> >>> The document already says it "updates 4007" so it seems that
what's
> >>> lacking is a section specifically updating RFC 4007 section 11
which would
> >>> declare that both '%' and '-' are acceptable separators in the
textual
> >>> representation.
> >>>
> >>> -Dave
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On
Behalf Of
> >>>> Ole Trøan
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 5:18 AM
> >>>> To: ipv6@ietf.org Mailing List
> >>>> Cc: 6man-chairs@tools.ietf.org Chairs; draft-ietf-6man-uri-
> >>>> zoneid@tools.ietf.org
> >>>> Subject: 6MAN WG [second] Last Call:
draft-ietf-6man-uri-zoneid-01.txt
> >>>>
> >>>> All,
> >>>>
> >>>> This message starts a one-week 6MAN Working Group Last Call on
advancing:
> >>>>     Title     : Representing IPv6 Zone Identifiers in Uniform
> >>>>                 Resource Identifiers
> >>>>     Author(s) : Brian Carpenter
> >>>>                 Robert M. Hinden
> >>>>     Filename  : draft-ietf-6man-uri-zoneid-01.txt
> >>>>     Pages     : 9
> >>>>     Date      : 2012-05-29
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> as a Proposed Standard. Substantive comments should be directed
to the
> >>>> mailing list or the co-chairs. Editorial suggestions can be sent
to the authors.
> >>>> This last call will end on June 20, 2012.
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>> Bob, & Ole
>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> >>>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> >>>> ipv6@ietf.org
> >>>> Administrative Requests:
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> >>>
>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> >>> ipv6@ietf.org
> >>> Administrative Requests:
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> >> ipv6@ietf.org
> >> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>