Re: 6MAN WG Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-text-addr-representation-01.txt>

I support it.

Half-substantive and half-editorial comments follow.

draft:
> When the length of the
>    consecutive 16 bit 0 fields are equal (i.e. 2001:db8:0:0:1:0:0:1),
>    the former is shortened.

The "former" when reading it left-to-right western latin style?  Maybe 
better "The most significant if represented in network byte order"?  Or 
similar.

Is there any intention to suggest this choice of placement of :: to the 
IEEE Unix ("Austin Group") who standardizes what inet_pton and ntop do:
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/

?

Or at least add a reference in the draft about the inet_ntop and pton 
standardization documents, which are IEEE (outside of IETF).

Finally, is there some implementation prototyping in support of 
recommendation of section 4?  I think there may be already.

Alex

Bob Hinden a écrit :
> All,
> 
> This message starts a 2-week 6MAN Working Group Last Call on advancing:
> 
> 
>     Title           : A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation
>     Author(s)       : S. Kawamura, M. Kawashima
>     Filename        : draft-ietf-6man-text-addr-representation-01.txt
>     Pages           : 14
>     Date            : 2009-10-18
> 
> 
> as a Proposed Standard.  Substantive comments and statements of support 
> for advancing this document should be directed to the mailing list. 
> Editorial suggestions can be sent to the document editor. 

Who is the document editor?

Alex

  This last
> call will end on November 5, 2009.
> 
> Regards,
> Bob Hinden & Brian Haberman
> 6MAN Chairs
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 