Re: Next steps for rfc6874bis

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Sun, 01 August 2021 22:37 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 034C63A1603 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Aug 2021 15:37:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 MWLsEJM8tEIj for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Aug 2021 15:37:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A23A3A1600 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 1 Aug 2021 15:37:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBB9A38A25; Sun, 1 Aug 2021 18:41:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id KhV6DaAPYvzc; Sun, 1 Aug 2021 18:41:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7FF638A22; Sun, 1 Aug 2021 18:41:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 269F8B24; Sun, 1 Aug 2021 18:37:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
cc: 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Next steps for rfc6874bis
In-Reply-To: <667b9ebb-3c99-8c5b-fa57-796e5bb84b4c@gmail.com>
References: <667b9ebb-3c99-8c5b-fa57-796e5bb84b4c@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2021 18:37:15 -0400
Message-ID: <31567.1627857435@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/Z-lyeiMGS7nwB6f7ce5YPgFHjnw>
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: Sun, 01 Aug 2021 22:37:25 -0000

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
    > Recurrent issue: ================

    > During the original discussion in 2012, and again recently, it was
    > suggested to change the delimiter from "%" to something else.  (The
    > discussion in 2012 suggested "-", e.g. http://[fe80::abcd-en1].)  This
    > was rejected in 2012 because it "Requires all IPv6 address literal
    > parsers and generators to be updated in order to allow simple cut and
    > paste; inconsistent with existing tools and practice."

    > Do we want to revisit this?

If it means that we can get the browser people onboard, then I'm open to
doing this.

Looking at my keyboard and thinking about shells and globs,
I see other possibilities as: "=", "+", ";", ",". Maybe "!"
But, I don't think we have to pick one until we have the bigger discussion.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide