IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Sip] URI comparison rules - IPv6 addresses

Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com> Wed, 21 November 2007 09:17 UTC

Return-path: <sip-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iulhj-0007nv-4Z; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 04:17:07 -0500
Received: from sip by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Iulhg-0007dE-LB for sip-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 04:17:04 -0500
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iulhg-0007Zo-6i for sip@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 04:17:04 -0500
Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.62]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iulhf-00012S-MP for sip@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 04:17:03 -0500
Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id A41D320FE2; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:17:02 +0100 (CET)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb3e-ae69ebb00000459d-2f-4743f78e37d3
Received: from esealmw128.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.121]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 8F5E1206E7; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:17:02 +0100 (CET)
Received: from esealmw128.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.176]) by esealmw128.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:17:02 +0100
Received: from mail.lmf.ericsson.se ([131.160.11.50]) by esealmw128.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:17:01 +0100
Received: from [131.160.36.58] (E000FB0F665DD.lmf.ericsson.se [131.160.36.58]) by mail.lmf.ericsson.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF4442461; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 11:17:01 +0200 (EET)
Message-ID: <4743F78D.4070705@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 11:17:01 +0200
From: Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: sip <sip@ietf.org>
References: <BBE61D1553D8A34F812FF87377B2935F01CCDE6A@ATL1VEXC020.usdom003.tco.tc> <4743F62A.8040903@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <4743F62A.8040903@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Nov 2007 09:17:01.0934 (UTC) FILETIME=[468D68E0:01C82C1F]
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab
Cc: Brett Tate <brett@broadsoft.com>
Subject: [Sip] URI comparison rules - IPv6 addresses
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.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://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: sip-bounces@ietf.org

Hi,

Brett brought this up in the SIP Implementors mailing list. The
following IPv6 addresses are supposed to be equivalent:

[::ffff:192.0.2.128] and [::ffff:c000:280]
[2001:db8::9:1] and [2001:db8::9:01]
[0:0:0:0:0:FFFF:129.144.52.38] and [::FFFF:129.144.52.38]

Now, let's say I need to compare sip:user1@[::ffff:192.0.2.128] and
sip:user1@[::ffff:c000:280]. Should we consider these URIs to be
equivalent or not?

My proposal is that we clarify that IPv6 address comparison happens at
the binary level, not at the textual level. We could log a bug against
RFC3261, and try and add such a clarification to the IPv6 transition
document (I will need to ask the ADs whether or not we can add this in
AUTH48).

Cheers,

Gonzalo


_______________________________________________
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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email