IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-6man-rfc6874bis-00.txt

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 06 July 2021 13:33 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 AEC143A27BA for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Jul 2021 06:33:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 Qk49sgkNetXr for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Jul 2021 06:32:59 -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 966963A27F8 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Jul 2021 06:32:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F60438A42; Tue, 6 Jul 2021 09:35:18 -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 KwIvofCveosc; Tue, 6 Jul 2021 09:35:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC8DE38A60; Tue, 6 Jul 2021 09:35:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id E14982B3; Tue, 6 Jul 2021 09:32:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Nico Schottelius <nico.schottelius@ungleich.ch>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, 6MAN WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-6man-rfc6874bis-00.txt
In-Reply-To: <87bl7flww8.fsf@ungleich.ch>
References: <162545101341.19246.8566193740265797873@ietfa.amsl.com> <95a7dbe5-e0a3-4676-9dcc-005ff53725e0@gmail.com> <CA+9kkMD3iSgo-KMM5Ed8bVnVCu_G3f2kB6zHKoOx2ta=x8QucA@mail.gmail.com> <CANMZLAbmdWHDRBPpHgy_e4_0-WUVW2gjnbXWwu2pF_xi-S0vWQ@mail.gmail.com> <87a6n13y0j.fsf@ungleich.ch> <CA+9kkMBx4F0FGZasdk11ogyCOwQZecAEkO4JbECDr4osySN-4w@mail.gmail.com> <01289d8c-a470-1867-448f-3d616647ba5f@gmail.com> <87bl7flww8.fsf@ungleich.ch>
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: Tue, 06 Jul 2021 09:32:46 -0400
Message-ID: <6771.1625578366@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/f1IL5-3VXC6zgVFs403J03_yUvo>
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, 06 Jul 2021 13:33:04 -0000

Nico Schottelius <nico.schottelius@ungleich.ch> wrote:
    > While copy & paste won't work with this proposal, I believe the %25
    > escape should be "good enough" for most daily usage.

Also, ping and/or getaddrinfo() could become tolerant of %25 as a special
case (and given that few Windows machines have 25 interfaces), which would
let the copy&paste work the other way.

    > In this regard, as a network operator, I can support this direction to
    > better have a, rather than no solution.

    > In a perfect world, the [...%] syntax would have been introduced (and
    > accepted) prior to % escape in URLs.

Agreed.

    > Another direction, which is probably also very unlikely to achieve,
    > would be to change the delimiter on OS basis and harmonise it with the
    > browser.

We could document another deliminter as a recommendation transition.
Looking at my keyboard, it's hard to pick one.   Only $ comes to mind.

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email