[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Evidence that the W3 is a Shill

• From: Steve Rowe <sarowe@t...>
• To: Dan Mabbutt <Seigfried@m...>
• Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 23:06:25 -0400

I don't know of any documentation of the "Full Decimal" IP address.

The Internet Protocol RFC 791 [1] (section 2.3) says:

   Addresses are fixed length of four octets (32 bits).

The so-called "Full Decimal" representation is simply the decimal
representation of these 32 bits as a single 32-bit number (rather than
as four separate 8-bit numbers, as in the decimal and octal dotted
quad notations).

The URI Syntax RFC 2396 [2] refers only to dotted quad notation.  The
radix of each of the four segments is not discussed, but RFC 2732
(Format for Literal IPv6 Addresses in URL's) [3] amends RFC 2396's
description of IPv4 addresses to limit the textual representation of
each of the four segments to 3 digits.  Although octal (actually, any
radix from 7 through 10) could theoretically serve to represent all 8
bits of a segment in the 3 digits available, the programming
convention of prepending a zero to octal literals would not be
possible.  Thus, given the allowable digit range ([0-9] -- radix can
be no more than 10), the overwhelming probability that decimal
notation is supported, and the impossibility of distinguishing decimal
from any other radix (given the 3 digit limitation), it's quite
certain that decimal is the one and only (de jure) standardized radix
for IPv4 address segments in URLs.

Because they are not specified in the URI/URL standard constellation,
alternative IPv4 address notations (such as "Full Decimal" and octal
dotted quad) are potentially not future-proof.  "Full Decimal"
notation in particular seems likely to go down in flames once IPv6
addressing becomes universal; what's the likelihood of browser support
for 39-decimal-digit host addresses (IPv6 addresses are 128 bits)?

Retroactive standardization aside (RFC 2732 is quite recent), I
suspect that alternative textual forms for IPv4 addresses have been
standardized de facto by browser makers hoping to gain the
hyper-compatibility high ground, where compatibility is measured as a
minimum of squeaky wheels asking for features (in the dark of the
valley of the shadow of the half-life of Berners-Lee-nium).

[1] Internet Protocol       http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc791.txt
[2] URI Syntax              http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt
[3] IPv6 Addresses in URLs  http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2732.txt

Dan Mabutt wrote:
> Sorry about disrupting an XML list but since were're
> already a little off track ... could you provide a link
> that documents the Full Decimal IP address?
>
> Steve Rowe wrote:
> > Dan Diebolt wrote:
> > > These ip addresses are all equivalent:
> > >
> > >    Octal fieldss  : http://00317.00056.00202.00071
> > >    Decimal fields : http://207.46.130.57
> > >    Full Decimal   : http://345931705
> >
> > Full Decimal should be (post-septal-elision-restorification):
> >
> >    http://3475931705

• Follow-Ups:
  • Decimal internet addresses (was: Re: Evidence that the W3 is a Shill)
    • From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>

• References:
  • RE: Evidence that the W3 is a Shill
    • From: Dan Mabbutt <Seigfried@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML Schema Datatype: unanswered questions.
• Next by Date: DSig & DOM & Databases
• Previous by thread: RE: Evidence that the W3 is a Shill
• Next by thread: Decimal internet addresses (was: Re: Evidence that the W3 is a Shill)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread