IPv6 address/port format

[Nathan Dorfman]

On Thu, Jan 13, 2000 at 07:07:56PM +0000, Rene Mayrhofer wrote:
> > Of course not. That is an unlucky case and we must live with it
> > since we have no impact on it anymore. But why shouldn't we create a
> > solution for IPv6 URL syntax which satisfies all the requirements
> > if we are still in time and position? If we choose the syntax watchfully,
> > such kind of conflicts can be avoided.
> 
> But I think that there is another point that has to be taken into
> account: Users must live with the solution. When we want a smooth
> upgrade from IPv4 to IPv6 (OK, as smooth as it can be anyway), then the
> change on the user interface should be minimized. 
> Remember, the majority of people using the Internet does not care about
> IP, they only use their tools like Web-browsers or email-clients.
> 
> I think it is very important for the acceptance of IPv6 that users
> should not notice the change at all. With URLs, there would only be a
> very small change if the above format would be used.
> 
> But you are completely right: There is a problem with UNIX shells that
> can be solved easier when we think about it now. Is there an easy way to
> cope with it without changing the format for URLs ? Can the "[" and "]"
> simply be escaped in the shells ? This should be possible when the tools
> are aware of it. 

% netscape http://[aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:ff:gg:hh]:8080/blah
No match.
% damn!
damn!: Command not found.
% logout

> cheers,
> Rene Mayrhofer

-- 
Nathan Dorfman <nathan@rtfm.net>         The statements and opinions in my
Unix Admin @ Frontline Communications    public posts are mine, not FCC's.
"The light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an approaching
train." --/usr/games/fortune