Re: [apps-discuss] RFC 5785: Registration of .well-known services under HTTP to First Come

[Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]>]

Sent from Outlook Mobile

    _____________________________
From: Matthew Kerwin <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 6:27 PM
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] RFC 5785: Registration of .well-known services under HTTP to First Come
To:  <[e-mail]>


    

I'm not quoting any previous discussion, I just want to make an observation: wasn't .well-known acknowledged to be an anti-pattern when it was set up? And isn't the DE role therefore to turn proposals away which would be better served by a (positive) pattern elsewhere, along with that explanation?   

The bar for .well-known should be very high because http != gopher, nor should it ever be.  
No, it was asserted but never conceded. More importantly, the IETF reviewed and agreed the RFC which makes no mention of such a position. The position of DE is not meant to be an opportunity to impose a private view of Internet architecture on anyone. It certainly isn't an opportunity to tell people that they should 'do it my way' and especially not when that turns out to be implement someone's 20 year old thesis.I am well aware of the style of architecture that people are suggesting it is the role of the DE to impose. It is a style that I played as much of a part in creating as anyone else did. It is a style that I have used and have since abandoned because I think other approaches are better.