Re: IPv6 address/port format
I suggest that we use the symbol of `#' to seperate the IP address and
the port *number*. Since `#' is mostly pronounced as `number'. :)) why
not 3ffe:3216:2101::1#8080?
-Wang Hui.
On Mon, 10 Jan 2000, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote:
> > I've seen people use both "IPv6-addr port" (space sep.) and
> >"IPv6-addr/port". I think I really like using '/', and haven't yet
> >found a place where that will cause problems except for in URIs.
> >Using spaces is just universally compliated. I guess we could use
> >something like '%', but then again, me randomly proposing things here
> >is probabaly not the best place to make suggestions usefully. ;-)
> >
> > - Chris
>
> I suppose we're suffering from a severe case of character overload:
>
> In the IPv4 world the convention is a.b.c.d:port, with a,b,c and d an
> external encoding base 10 of the 4-bytes of the 32bit address.
>
> Talking in routing terms the convention is a.b.c.d/prefix, with a.b.c.d
> being the network part of the address and a prefix length [1..32] in
> bits, again given as a number base 10.
>
> In the IPv6 world, both the ".", as well as the ":" as well as the "/"
> are being used to specify the address and/or the length of the routing
> prefix.
> The external erpresentation uses base 16, with the 128 bits grouped into
> 8 fields of 16 bits each, separated by colons (see RFC 2373):
>
> FE80::02A0:24FF:FE9D:5094 (e.g. for a MAC Address of 00a0.249d.5094)
>
> 3FFE:8034:80::0/48 (e.g. for a routing prefix)
>
> ::FFFF:10.2.3.4 (e.g. for a mixed v4/v6 environment)
>
> We already ran into the port specification problem for IPv6, last resort
> was to use white-space. Hmmm....
>
> Wilfried.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber@CC.UniVie.ac.at
> Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33
> Vienna University : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140
> Universitaetsstrasse 7 : RIPE-DB Handle: WW144
> A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : PGP public key ID 0xF0ACB369
> __________________________________________________________________________
>
Reply to: