Re: [IPv6] [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc6874bis-02
Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.apps-discuss,gmane.ietf.ipv6 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 27-Mar-23 14:07, Rob Sayre wrote: > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 6:01 PM Brian E Carpenter <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > > It's not allowed in the original grammar. This is why the draft rewrites the "IP-literal" rule to allow for a zone identifier. I think the catch here is that the chosen delimiter is "%", and that causes problems for URI parsers that are not updated for this issue. You could use a character that would not have this problem, as Appendix A describes. > > But what is the operational or security problem? Again, the draft explains why a parsing error by a non-updated destination simply doesn't matter. > > > The issue is that software ignorant of dereferencing can't parse these. So, you're not actually going to be able to paste an IPv6-with-zone address. But, if you followed the grammar, it would work. That is what "uniform" means, right? I 100% fail to understand what you mean. http://[fe80::abcd-eth0] won't parse today any better than http://[fe80::abcd%eth0]. Neither of them respects the current grammar. Whatever we do here extends the grammar. Brian > All of the water-under-the-bridge stuff is fair too, but please treat the issue up front. > > thanks, > Rob > _______________________________________________ art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/art