Re: Next steps for rfc6874bis

On 13-Aug-21 07:21, Mark Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Aug 2021 at 03:24, Kerry Lynn
> <kerlyn=40ieee.org@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>> If I could add my $0.02 (even though I'm not current on all the
>> discussions and details):
> 
> As I'm not either, however another 2c.
> 
> Non-technical end users shouldn't be exposed or have to even enter
> IPv6 addresses, including link-locals. While convenient to be able to
> enter them into a URL field in a browser, it shouldn't be a common
> thing to do.

Of course. The use cases are not ones that ordinary users should need.

   Brian

> 
> For user friendly end user access to device web GUIs over link-local
> addresses, the devices announcing themselves via MDNS would be better.
> I have a laser printer that already uses MDNS to announce its IPv6
> address.
> 
> Web browsers could provide a user-friendly selection list showing
> devices discovered via MDNS. An extension for Firefox that looks to do
> this already exists -
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/mdns-discover/
> 
> For technical users who need to enter link-local addresses and
> interface/zone IDs, having a technical dialog box, with separate IPv6
> address and interface/zone ID fields, hidden away under more technical
> menu options (like Firefox's "More Tools" menu) should be adequate to
> resolve this thread's issue by avoiding it.
> 
> Regards,
> Mark.
> 
>> - I believe http://[fe80::%eth0] _used to work_ in Mozilla browsers;
>>   we're talking maybe early 2000s. The earliest version I can find online
>>   is c. 2015. Pretty sure I might have old VMs that can demonstrate
>>   the functionality. (Let's assume there's an existence proof for parsing
>>   a naked '%' between square brackets.)
>> - If this has to be approved by the browser community as a condition
>>   of it becoming widely available, do we know if they will support link
>>   local addresses in principle? (If not, then the utility of this for e.g.
>>   consumer router setup is moot.)
>> - If the browser community can support this in principal, then we can
>>   discuss EBNF. I strongly favor the syntax above, but any single char
>>   is better than "%25". Certain OSes (not naming any names) use
>>   numeric ZoneIDs and I think the cognitive dissonance of "%25<nn>"
>>   is problematic.
>> - If the browser community cannot support this, then we could perhaps
>>   develop a patch for cURL to make it available at least for the engineering
>>   community (I haven't checked cURL to see if it's already supported).
>>
>> Cheers, Kerry
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 