draft-ietf-6man-text-addr-representation-05.txt		draft-ietf-6man-text-addr-representation-06.txt
	IPv6 Maintenance Working Group S. Kawamura		IPv6 Maintenance Working Group S. Kawamura
	Internet-Draft NEC BIGLOBE, Ltd.		Internet-Draft NEC BIGLOBE, Ltd.
	Updates: 4291 (if approved) M. Kawashima		Updates: 4291 (if approved) M. Kawashima
	Intended status: Standards Track NEC AccessTechnica, Ltd.		Intended status: Standards Track NEC AccessTechnica, Ltd.
	Expires: August 21, 2010 February 17, 2010		Expires: August 23, 2010 February 19, 2010
	A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation		A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation
	draft-ietf-6man-text-addr-representation-05		draft-ietf-6man-text-addr-representation-06
	Abstract		Abstract
	As IPv6 network grows, there will be more engineers and also non-		As IPv6 network grows, there will be more engineers and also non-
	engineers who will have the need to use an IPv6 address in text.		engineers who will have the need to use an IPv6 address in text.
	While the IPv6 address architecture RFC 4291 section 2.2 depicts a		While the IPv6 address architecture RFC 4291 section 2.2 depicts a
	flexible model for text representation of an IPv6 address, this		flexible model for text representation of an IPv6 address, this
	flexibility has been causing problems for operators, system		flexibility has been causing problems for operators, system
	engineers, and users. This document will describe the problems that		engineers, and users. This document will describe the problems that
	a flexible text representation has been causing. This document also		a flexible text representation has been causing. This document also
	skipping to change at page 1, line 48		skipping to change at page 1, line 48
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at		The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
	http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.		http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
	The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at		The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
	http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.		http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
	This Internet-Draft will expire on August 21, 2010.		This Internet-Draft will expire on August 23, 2010.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	skipping to change at page 11, line 8		skipping to change at page 11, line 8
	Addresses such as IPv4-Mapped IPv6 addresses, ISATAP [RFC5214], and		Addresses such as IPv4-Mapped IPv6 addresses, ISATAP [RFC5214], and
	IPv4-translatable addresses [I-D.ietf-behave-address-format] have		IPv4-translatable addresses [I-D.ietf-behave-address-format] have
	IPv4 addresses embedded in the low-order 32 bits of the address.		IPv4 addresses embedded in the low-order 32 bits of the address.
	These addresses have special representation that may mix hexadecimal		These addresses have special representation that may mix hexadecimal
	and dot decimal notations. The decimal notation may be used only for		and dot decimal notations. The decimal notation may be used only for
	the last 32 bits of the address. For these addresses, mixed notation		the last 32 bits of the address. For these addresses, mixed notation
	is RECOMMENDED if the following condition is met: The address can be		is RECOMMENDED if the following condition is met: The address can be
	distinguished as having IPv4 addresses embedded in the lower 32 bits		distinguished as having IPv4 addresses embedded in the lower 32 bits
	solely from the address field through the use of a well known prefix.		solely from the address field through the use of a well known prefix.
	Such prefixes are defined in [RFC4291] and [RFC5214] at the time of		Such prefixes are defined in [RFC4291] and [RFC2765] at the time of
	writing. If it is known by some external method that a given prefix		writing. If it is known by some external method that a given prefix
	includes an IPv4 address, it MAY be represented as mixed notation.		is used to embed IPv4, it MAY be represented as mixed notation.
	Tools that provide options to specify prefixes that is (or is not) to		Tools that provide options to specify prefixes that are (or are not)
	be represented as mixed notation may be useful.		to be represented as mixed notation may be useful.
	There is a trade-off here where a recommendation to achieve exact		There is a trade-off here where a recommendation to achieve exact
	match in a search (no dot decimals whatsoever) and recommendation to		match in a search (no dot decimals whatsoever) and recommendation to
	help the readability of an addresses (dot decimal whenever possible)		help the readability of an addresses (dot decimal whenever possible)
	does not result in the same solution. The above recommendation is		does not result in the same solution. The above recommendation is
	aimed at fixing the representation as much as possible while leaving		aimed at fixing the representation as much as possible while leaving
	the opportunity for future well known prefixes to be represented in a		the opportunity for future well known prefixes to be represented in a
	human friendly manner as tools adjust to newly assigned prefixes.		human friendly manner as tools adjust to newly assigned prefixes.
	The text representation method noted in Section 4 should be applied		The text representation method noted in Section 4 should be applied
	skipping to change at page 12, line 42		skipping to change at page 12, line 42
	and Kurt Lindqvist for their support in bringing this document to the		and Kurt Lindqvist for their support in bringing this document to the
	light of IETF working groups.		light of IETF working groups.
	11. References		11. References
	11.1. Normative References		11.1. Normative References
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
			[RFC2765] Nordmark, E., "Stateless IP/ICMP Translation Algorithm
			(SIIT)", RFC 2765, February 2000.
	[RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing		[RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
	Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006.		Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006.
	11.2. Informative References		11.2. Informative References
	[I-D.ietf-behave-address-format]		[I-D.ietf-behave-address-format]
	Huitema, C., Bao, C., Bagnulo, M., Boucadair, M., and X.		Huitema, C., Bao, C., Bagnulo, M., Boucadair, M., and X.
	Li, "IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators",		Li, "IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators",
	draft-ietf-behave-address-format-04 (work in progress),		draft-ietf-behave-address-format-04 (work in progress),
	January 2010.		January 2010.
End of changes. 6 change blocks.
	7 lines changed or deleted		10 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.38. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/