Subject: [Sip] Last Call: draft-ietf-sip-ipv6-abnf-fix (Essential correction for IPv6 ABNF and URI comparison in RFC3261) to Proposed Standard

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 15:30:33 -0800 (PST)

The IESG has received a request from the Session Initiation Protocol WG 
(sip) to consider the following document:

- 'Essential correction for IPv6 ABNF and URI comparison in RFC3261 '
   <draft-ietf-sip-ipv6-abnf-fix-04.txt> as a Proposed Standard

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action.  Please send substantive comments to the
[email-masked] mailing lists by 2010-03-19. Exceptionally, 
comments may be sent to [email-masked] instead. In either case, please 
retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

The file can be obtained via
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sip-ipv6-abnf-fix-04.txt

IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=16959&rfc_flag=0

---

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2010 19:17:39 -0500

I see this is very close to done.
I'm sorry to only be looking at it now.
While I don't see a problem with what is in this,
I do see a logical omission:

This calls out that comparison of the binary forms of the ip address, 
and this fixes a problem with ipv4 as well as ipv6.

A similar problem exists for the port number:
are <sip:foo@bar:1234> and <sip:foo@bar:01234> the same???

ISTM that binary comparison should also be used for port numbers.

But is it worth pulling this back to fix that???

	Thanks,
	Paul

The IESG wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> This list is essentially closed and only used for finishing old business.
> Use [email-masked] for questions on how to develop a SIP implementation.
> Use [email-masked] for new developments on the application of sip.
> Use [email-masked] for issues related to maintenance of the core SIP specifications.
>

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2010 14:43:58 +1300

I'd like to note that the authors are aware that
draft-ietf-6man-text-addr-representation-07 is now
proposed for the standards track, and this may mean
it becomes a normative reference for sip-ipv6-abnf-fix
(and applicable to SIP implementations).

   Brian Carpenter

On 2010-03-06 12:30, The IESG wrote:
> IETF-Announce mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
>