zero suppression vs compression in addresses

[Joe Abley]

On 15-May-2009, at 16:00, <michael.dillon at bt.com>  
<michael.dillon at bt.com> wrote:

>> I think I may have misinterpreted how zero compression and  
>> suppression
>> work:  when I say 2607:f678:1::0/60, I expect the "::" to
>> mean "all 0's from the preceding digit to the next", but from
>> what I'm seeing configuring things, (leading) zero
>> *suppression* seems to be happening at the same time within
>> word (32 bit) boundaries, which colons always delineate,
>> making that really 2607:f678:0001::0/60.  Thus what I really
>> wanted to say was 2607:f678:1000::0/60.
>
> The rules on this may be about to change. See this draft:
> http://tools.ietf.org/search/draft-kawamura-ipv6-text- 
> representation-02

Unless I am missing some text, that document is promoting a canonical  
representation for presentation of addresses, not changing the rules  
by which addresses are parsed.


Joe