IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Link-local IPv6 addresses in URIs

Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> Thu, 17 November 2011 12:56 UTC

Return-Path: <brian@innovationslab.net>
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 49E8021F9A2E for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 04:56:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.885
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.885 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.286, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 WEoB2oLnBs4w for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 04:56:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from uillean.fuaim.com (uillean.fuaim.com [206.197.161.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D162321F9A2D for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 04:56:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clairseach.fuaim.com (clairseach.fuaim.com [206.197.161.141]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by uillean.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9986488214 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 04:56:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clemson.jhuapl.edu (unknown [128.244.243.28]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clairseach.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66219130002 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 04:56:02 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4EC50461.7070909@innovationslab.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 07:56:01 -0500
From: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Link-local IPv6 addresses in URIs
References: <CABOxzu0np9tCJgurrL6zCc1CpHd6KbrUdwnL5UocE6TM8a_G2w@mail.gmail.com> <4EC0E1FD.6050107@gmail.com> <4EC494EB.4070000@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4EC494EB.4070000@gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 12:56:03 -0000

On 11/17/11 12:00 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Dear 6man,
> 
> Kerry and I talked about this. It seems to me that, given we allow for
> IPv6 literals in URIs principally for diagnostic purposes, it is indeed
> unfortunate that http://[fe80::206:98ff:fe00:232%tap0] is not
> allowed by the formal syntax.
> 
> This would need to be fixed by a small RFC that updates 3986,
> just as 2732 updated 2396 in its day.
> 
> Do people agree that this is a reasonable thing to do? If so, I'll
> follow it up appropriately (i.e. I will draft something when time permits).

I agree that it is reasonable to do.

Regards,
Brian

v2.19.0 | Report a Bug | By Email