Re: Heads-up re: IPv6 addresses in URLs (from IPng-WG minutes)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Ben Laurie: "Re: Multiple Content-Location headers"
• Previous message: Jacob Palme: "Re: Multiple Content-Location headers"
• In reply to: Koen Holtman: "Re: Heads-up re: IPv6 addresses in URLs (from IPng-WG minutes)"
• Next in thread: Josh Cohen: "RE: Heads-up re: IPv6 addresses in URLs (from IPng-WG minutes)"

At 21:52 01/12/98 +0100, Koen Holtman wrote:
>We did not really reach a consensus, but one intermediate conclusion
>was that a notation like
>
> http://1080::8:800:200C:417A.8000/blah
>
>with the . separating the address from the port number, would do the
>trick.  I see however that you quoted some ipv6 addresses which have a
>. in them above, I think we assumed at the time that the ipv6 notation
>would use : only. 

This is correct. IPV6 can "contain" IPV4 addresses and this can be done by
concatenating IPV6 syntax and IPV4 syntax so that an IP address can contain
both : and . as separators.

Ugly, huh?

Henrik
--
Henrik Frystyk Nielsen,
World Wide Web Consortium
http://www.w3.org/People/Frystyk

• Next message: Ben Laurie: "Re: Multiple Content-Location headers"
• Previous message: Jacob Palme: "Re: Multiple Content-Location headers"
• In reply to: Koen Holtman: "Re: Heads-up re: IPv6 addresses in URLs (from IPng-WG minutes)"
• Next in thread: Josh Cohen: "RE: Heads-up re: IPv6 addresses in URLs (from IPng-WG minutes)"