Message235768
| Author |
martin.panter |
| Recipients |
martin.panter, ngierman |
| Date |
2015年02月11日.21:03:40 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1423688621.2.0.0893826479394.issue23448@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
I’m no IPv6 expert, but there seems to be a few standards:
* <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6874> (Feb 2013). Encodes as http://[fe80::1%25eth0]/; says Windows uses this form. Also mentions the unencoded http://[fe80::1%eth0]/ form. Says that the HTTP Host header should not include the scope zone identifier, since it is not necessarily relevant to the server.
* <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sweet-uri-zoneid-01> (Nov 2013). Encodes as http://[v1.fe80::1+eth0]/; says CUPS uses this form. Also acknowledges the RFC %25 form. Says that the Host header _should_ include the scope, to help with servers that send back self-referencing absolute URLs.
Also, I would probably find IP.split('%', 1)[0] easier to read than a regular expression. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2015年02月11日 21:03:41 | martin.panter | set | recipients:
+ martin.panter, ngierman |
| 2015年02月11日 21:03:41 | martin.panter | set | messageid: <1423688621.2.0.0893826479394.issue23448@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2015年02月11日 21:03:41 | martin.panter | link | issue23448 messages |
| 2015年02月11日 21:03:40 | martin.panter | create |
|