Re: [Sip] Re: URI comparison rules

Jeroen van Bemmel wrote:
> Vijay,
> It's not only IPv6: what about 127.0.0.1 versus 127.000.000.1?

Jeroen: Pedantically speaking, you are probably right.  But
in practice we do not generally see leading zeros in an IPv4
octet.

IPv6, with its compressed notation and the need to represent
hybrid addresses (like IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses) makes the
representation issue more acute.  For instance, the low-order
32 bits of an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address can be represented using
the familiar dotted-decimal notation, or they can be represented
using the IPv6 colon-separated notation.

But your point is well taken: if we put some text about the
binary equivalence of different textual representations of an
IPv6 address, I guess we should do so for IPv4 as well.

Thanks,

- vijay
-- 
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
2701 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9F-546, Lisle, Illinois 60532 (USA)
Email: vkg@{alcatel-lucent.com,bell-labs.com,acm.org}
WWW:   http://www.alcatel-lucent.com/bell-labs

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip

Re: [Sip] Re: URI comparison rules - IPv6 addresses