[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       cifs-protocol
Subject:    Re: [cifs-protocol] [MS-ADTS] 6.1.1.2.2.2.1 Subnet Object address range [REG:116011913603795]
From:       Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall () catalyst ! net ! nz>
Date:       2016-01-27 22:57:00
Message-ID: 56A94B3C.2030808 () catalyst ! net ! nz
[Download RAW message or body]

hi Jeff,

Yes, I understand now.

thanks,
Douglas

On 28/01/16 09:14, Jeff McCashland wrote:
> Hi Douglas,
> 
> I believe that agrees with RFC 5952, which is referenced by [MS-ADTS] (updated per \
> the previous issue) to define the canonical format. 
> 5.  Text Representation of Special Addresses
> Addresses such as IPv4-Mapped IPv6 addresses, ISATAP [RFC5214], and
> IPv4-translatable addresses [ADDR-FORMAT] have IPv4 addresses
> embedded in the low-order 32 bits of the address.  These addresses
> have a special representation that may mix hexadecimal and dot
> decimal notations.  The decimal notation may be used only for the
> last 32 bits of the address.  For these addresses, mixed notation is
> RECOMMENDED if the following condition is met: the address can be
> distinguished as having IPv4 addresses embedded in the lower 32 bits
> solely from the address field through the use of a well-known prefix.
> Such prefixes are defined in [RFC4291] and [RFC2765] at the time of
> this writing.  If it is known by some external method that a given
> prefix is used to embed IPv4, it MAY be represented as mixed
> notation.  Tools that provide options to specify prefixes that are
> (or are not) to be represented as mixed notation may be useful.
> 
> The address range you're referring to falls in this category:
> " mixed notation is
> RECOMMENDED if the following condition is met: the address can be
> distinguished as having IPv4 addresses embedded in the lower 32 bits
> solely from the address field through the use of a well-known prefix."
> 
> So it is appropriate to use mixed notation with the well-known prefix \
> 0:0:0:0:0:FFFF.  
> Does that answer the question? 
> 
> If not, could you let me know what tool you're using and the steps for creating \
> subnets over LDAP? I'm not sure how to do that. 
> Best regards,
> Jeff McCashland | Senior Escalation Engineer | Microsoft Protocol Open \
>                 Specifications Team 
> Phone: +1 (425) 703-8300 x38300 | Hours: 9am-5pm | Time zone: (UTC-08:00) Pacific \
> Time (US and Canada) Local country phone number found here: \
> http://support.microsoft.com/globalenglish | Extension 1138300 We value your \
> feedback.  My manager is Nam Su Kang (nkang), +1 (980) 776-7499 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Douglas Bagnall [mailto:douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 1:33 PM
> To: Jeff McCashland <jeffm@microsoft.com>
> Cc: cifs-protocol@lists.samba.org; MSSolve Case Email <casemail@microsoft.com>
> Subject: Re: [MS-ADTS] 6.1.1.2.2.2.1 Subnet Object address range \
> [REG:116011913603795] 
> Hi Jeff,
> > As I understand now, you're able to create subnets using other IPv4-Mapped \
> > addresses in addition to "::FFFF:0:0/nn"? 
> 
> Yes, if I use the mixed form "::FFFF:1.2.3.4/nn" rather than the pure
> IPv6 "::FFFF:12:34/nn".
> 
> cheers,
> Douglas
> 


_______________________________________________
cifs-protocol mailing list
cifs-protocol@lists.samba.org
https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-protocol


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

Configure | About | News | Add a list | Sponsored by KoreLogic