IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] Review of draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme

t.petch <ietfc@btconnect.com> Wed, 13 April 2016 16:55 UTC

Return-Path: <ietfc@btconnect.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6D3D12DB7C; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:55:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.921
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.921 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=btconnect.onmicrosoft.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1pN8jJfoDJXu; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:55:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR01-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-he1eur01on0091.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.0.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E140A12D9C2; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:55:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btconnect.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-btconnect-com; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=NiSnLoYJRE3B06v9r8hT99tfYkSyqkrCfYwJnBS6Glg=; b=IWFv4m8n0aQP7flhrswrwHhxCtXfDCMZ3lQVL6DFYZIy7c2y1n245sEUolBzXeUSaeJJgWm7jhstndwxmdSjFfaa3aTZNUOWrf0C7CglQ3C0voD7Yth4cRyn1QvtK23SFfx1mX9A5js4N92lafVczwmxg7fAi9I6s8Fb+OctxJY=
Authentication-Results: ninebynine.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ninebynine.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=btconnect.com;
Received: from pc6 (86.171.1.17) by AM4PR07MB1620.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.166.132.150) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.453.11; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 16:55:54 +0000
Message-ID: <01ba01d195a4$eadbbee0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
From: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>
To: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>, Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
References: <570D4C99.1030405@dcrocker.net> <CACweHND-OX+5okkJ+oE=6UN84x+CFtPBpMnU8HqaPbgQgJ_oWA@mail.gmail.com> <570E225B.4090504@ninebynine.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 17:42:45 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Originating-IP: [86.171.1.17]
X-ClientProxiedBy: DB3PR08CA0017.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com (10.161.51.155) To AM4PR07MB1620.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.166.132.150)
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: f4c26897-63be-440b-497e-08d363bc7aed
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; AM4PR07MB1620; 2:9yi8PY7+X47E09SZyIptXO9IwpEx0kh6ZuxB18YrqRba8ZU/TQ9vKKfjMnhuz5yk5OIW1FrG37egSOvNkAL881HSRBSTv9Ts68AtNC5RZ2BIM0T4yOYHEVfWZ+gVWhtGZnWgc/BLCLQvPa4cGUbePSyWkff6f9FL1cjYmMZfxEdXsGtA7f2psq6t7I7GeMM2; 3:WQF/TqUji/oL7brGGt0uKOtEDws7ZUGn330dCFybw9naJt5wRfG7K2sysxAzyksve7uA0voWpVNbu3/d8s065YC822QkV4IncCYb1kfC7KLBfp9OX7CJvLQ0DJ/h3gUz; 25:5dJ2NAh/ibo3pCCQB0rYlwtlQApMVmjzMi+7h5PDipio2i/R1uoAPO5T+SJ9wx73EQcrS+MJx7mS/qAX1SPmBCnn9j+kfl0mOSDIdpbDVp+ph/l5OvGraAg03+5tAlAUk4cv1mIOvGoAB/53A9sPchFXjMwiihWyRTNXt08bjAGHZ7HtoKnE5xlQjlNO4n6pufcNQqS2Rb0QP9eQza7a8hOAB5bh7sMRKQrXJeq6/7EN8AkMzaA8/YRB9k/Z4WLWS5rjPd3KPEbC547g7+gH08oQrIXVNt9WnAhPjLEMm3L/mHQsK4mUyJrQQcZHAo/sTkVtmqI365sLZRFc0FCs5w==
X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:AM4PR07MB1620;
X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: <AM4PR07MB162073FA717FF6291746CE8BA0960@AM4PR07MB1620.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:;
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:AM4PR07MB1620; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:AM4PR07MB1620;
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; AM4PR07MB1620; 4:5ofjFnrD634z/QIM10aioGnLbPTWEBux5PGFm8QT5GNDnFbE0P3WOe8VhpY5dV/tN2vmwoBLlTB1ELX6EDXPuT7MFvDZ0JKYPTmbTA6tB1jvtTJxFHIlit2NEM1nu1bE9vs3yKwNGzwosNkKvLTUrEQXJfDNCmwHKDilxrdGDDWiWnJjkSjkr+4FJWtzD04LQdm83FbEuuDvWo8ZMUYkWWQs2WZYh8G1zY881zwLSRVpvUcjzoCCFx8N7ZarRns9BoXScYZvTX9ifvOmZyHhNGr902TGCNNN9aBELIOFaIcG+lbMAcwYLFEgUTMffIFX9kCWbH4MxfhzfsL/fl6ZAUNrH6DvkvkeTVsQVIP4rj/IeveP7XDzIOFSidNqKanh
X-Forefront-PRVS: 0911D5CE78
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(4630300001)(6009001)(13464003)(76104003)(24454002)(377454003)(81166005)(5008740100001)(230700001)(586003)(4326007)(84392002)(15975445007)(42186005)(1456003)(77096005)(2906002)(9686002)(61296003)(1556002)(44716002)(62236002)(47776003)(230783001)(81816999)(50986999)(81686999)(76176999)(66066001)(86362001)(5001770100001)(5004730100002)(92566002)(3846002)(1096002)(6116002)(23756003)(19580405001)(19580395003)(189998001)(50226001)(50466002)(33646002)(74416001)(7726001)(4720700001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:AM4PR07MB1620; H:pc6; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; AM4PR07MB1620; 23: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
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; AM4PR07MB1620; 5:ey76PHnU+6VgeMVA4EVZu6bIHGIyTptstrTriifLgJ9n0B5UnisreqkWA+CazrpP+oL5qmzlXcVNX5UKwZh0b5HMl+YATXyl20ZTE++7LbBKFU6+kf045qflgAPMuC4LAhaSKg4wxvjLcxNvqzmS9g==; 24:zLbroSVSWD9ukwCgxLCqxhE2OIN3J4d1W3bOd2lL44agQwyaaFOoP6kc0DS3FveultQdo9+c3jBedUWnx4ErtYYbx10yRhobgWMPI9YBCZc=
SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:23
SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM
X-OriginatorOrg: btconnect.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Apr 2016 16:55:54.3619 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM4PR07MB1620
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/8opr48BU6ty7_Xaw6bceQwHspOw>
Cc: Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Review of draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/apps-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 16:56:00 -0000

----- Original Message -----
From: "Graham Klyne" <gk@ninebynine.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 11:41 AM


> On 13/04/2016 09:28, Matthew Kerwin wrote:
> > For a specification involving such a potentially and presumably
important
> >> >capability, I think significant community support should be
required...
> >> >unless the spec is to be offered as Experimental, which is the
most I'm
> >> >inclined to recommend at this point...
> >> >
> >> >
> > To be honest, if that's what you think is most suitable and if we
can't
> > improve it, I don't have a problem with Experimental. We're fighting
> > against decades of stagnation and ennui; if an Experimental spec can
kick
> > some life into it and stir up the muck that's a good start. If
something
> > resolves out of it, then there's nothing wrong with redoing it
"properly"
> > in future, with more engagement and recent experience to call on.
> >
> > But to reiterate, it's already implemented pretty widely so I don't
think
> > it can count as an "experimental scheme" -- rather, this would be an
> > experiment in restandardising a diverged and stagnant scheme.
>
> +1
>
> file:// URIs are *very* widely used - I don't think it makes sense to
call them
> "experimental".  I think it should be standards-track, but if the
community
> can't agree then I'd suggest "informational" with permanent
registration.

RFC2026

"   The "Experimental" designation typically denotes a specification
that
   is part of some research or development effort. "

No, I do not think that this I-D comes into that category.

Tom Petch

> (I don't anticipate any spec needing to normatively reference file:
URI
> specifically, as opposed to URIs generically, so I don't see
"informational"
> causing any problems.)
>
> #g
> --
>
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email