This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/db-wg@ripe.net/

[dns-wg] Re: [db-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute

Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Re: [db-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute
Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Re: [db-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Carsten Schiefner ripe-wgs.cs at schiefner.de
Thu Jun 1 14:35:24 CEST 2006

Katie,

to avoid any ambiguity in:

Katie Petrusha wrote:
> The IPv6 textual compressed form (Section 2.2.2, RFC 4291) is also
> accepted (see examples) and will be converted into lowercase canonical
> form.

and to also cover:

nserver: ns1.d1.example.com 2001:DB8:0:0:0:0:0:0

besides:

> nserver: ns1.d1.example.com 2001:db8:0:0:0:0:0:0

I would like to see this paragraph rephrased to:

The IPv6 notation can be case insensitive, the textual compressed form 
(Section 2.2.2, RFC 4291) is also accepted (see examples). 
[ipv6_address] will always be converted into lowercase canonical form.

Best,

	-C.

Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Re: [db-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute
Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Re: [db-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[ db-wg Archives ]