[Varnish] #1801: Fail parsing IPv6 constants

[Varnish]

#1801: Fail parsing IPv6 constants
----------------------+----------------------
 Reporter:  fgsch     |       Owner:
     Type:  defect    |      Status:  closed
 Priority:  normal    |   Milestone:
Component:  varnishd  |     Version:  4.1.0
 Severity:  normal    |  Resolution:  wontfix
 Keywords:            |
----------------------+----------------------
Changes (by phk):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => wontfix


Comment:

 This is not our fault.

 Despite widespread use of the IP:PORT notation, some dimwits decided to
 format IPv6 addresses using ':' as separator.

 Ever since then things have been going downhill.

 Here is my partial list of RFC's which define how IPv6 addresses look:

 {{{
         RFC1884 -> 2373         1080::8:800:200C:417A
         RFC1884                 ::13.1.68.3
         RFC1884                 ::FFFF:129.144.52.38
         RFC1924 4)+k&C#VzJ4br>0wv%Yp
         RFC2133 -> 2133
         RFC2292 -> 3542
         RFC2373 -> 3513
         RFC2428 EPRT |2|1080::8:800:200C:417A|5282|
         RFC2553 -> RFC3493
         RFC2732 -> 3986 http://[3ffe:2a00:100:7031::1]:8080/
         RFC3493 "numeric format"
         RFC3513 -> 4291
         RFC3986 BNF form
         RFC3986 http://[3ffe:2a00:100:7031::1]:8080/
         RFC3986 http://[v%x.????]/
         RFC5952 [2001:db8::1]:80
 }}}

 Despite its publication date, I prefer RFC1924 since it would clearly
 encourage DNS use.

 Anyhow, the "[IPv6]:port" notation is the HTTP way and that's what we're
 using.

 The only other consistent policy would be to ditch IP:PORT notation
 entirely.

 We already support space as a seperator in that case, but that requires
 quoting stuff on the command line.

 We need a close-reason for tickets along the lines of "Doesn't Work For Me
 But The World Sucks"

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://www.varnish-cache.org/trac/ticket/1801#comment:3>
Varnish <https://varnish-cache.org/>
The Varnish HTTP Accelerator