Re: [Sip] Question regarding conflicting grammar for IPV6 SIP URI andRFC 3986

"Brett Tate" <brett@broadsoft.com> Thu, 18 December 2008 23:26 UTC

Return-Path: <sip-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: sip-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-sip-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 308633A68AE; Thu, 18 Dec 2008 15:26:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 630153A687F for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Dec 2008 15:26:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.879
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.879 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.480, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_37=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_39=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DdheOycEhSSP for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Dec 2008 15:26:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ATL1VEXC020.usdom003.tco.tc (atl1vexc020.usdom003.tco.tc [209.225.56.95]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB4763A6829 for <SIP@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Dec 2008 15:26:06 -0800 (PST)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 18:25:58 -0500
Message-ID: <BBE61D1553D8A34F812FF87377B2935F06268200@ATL1VEXC020.usdom003.tco.tc>
In-Reply-To: <494AD1EA.30506@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Sip] Question regarding conflicting grammar for IPV6 SIP URI andRFC 3986
Thread-Index: AclhYfVRlzZaF+P8TK6RWN+juPccYQAAEkDA
From: Brett Tate <brett@broadsoft.com>
To: "Vijay K. Gurbani" <vkg@alcatel-lucent.com>, SIP@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Sip] Question regarding conflicting grammar for IPV6 SIP URI andRFC 3986
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: sip-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: sip-bounces@ietf.org

Intentional or not, the sip-uri (excluding IPv6reference) appears to not
violate extending rfc2396's absoluteURI because the definition was a
structured subset of opaque_part.  However the introduction of brackets
to enclose an IPv6 address causes the sip-uri to no longer be a valid
absoluteURI (rfc2396) or absolute-URI (rfc3986).

I'm currently not sure if a fix is really needed or how best to correct
it.  Escaping the brackets might work; however that might cause more
headaches.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vijay K. Gurbani [mailto:vkg@alcatel-lucent.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 5:43 PM
> To: Brett Tate
> Cc: SIP@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Sip] Question regarding conflicting grammar for 
> IPV6 SIP URI andRFC 3986
> 
> Brett Tate wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >  
> > Mike's interpretation looks correct.  Is this something 
> that should be 
> > fixed?  If so, should the fix be placed within 
> > draft-ietf-sip-ipv6-abnf-fix?
> 
> What should the fix be?  Mike's claim is that rfc3261 
> violates rfc3986, yet rfc3986 is internally consistent in 
> that it requires IPv6 literals to be enclosed in "[" and "]",
> viz:
> 
>     IP-literal = "[" ( IPv6address / IPvFuture  ) "]"
> 
> At the same time, rfc3261 is internally consistent in that it 
> requires IPv6reference to be enclosed in "[" and "]", viz:
> 
>    IPv6reference  =  "[" IPv6address "]"
> 
> Furthermore, I don't think the intent is to produce SIP-URI 
> (as defined in rfc3261) from a URI (as defined in rfc3986), is it?
> Note that rfc3986 defines URI as:
> 
>    URI = scheme ":" hier-part ...
>    heir-part = "//" ...
> 
> If this was true, a SIP URI would need to be produced as:
> 
>    sip://[2001:db8:10] ...
> 
> In other words, I am trying to understand what the exact 
> problem is before we try to figure out where to put the fix in...
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> - vijay
> --
> Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent 1960 
> Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60566 (USA)
> Email: vkg@{alcatel-lucent.com,bell-labs.com,acm.org}
> Web:   http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/
> 
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.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