IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] [taugh.com-standards] Comments on draft-levine-orgboundary

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Mon, 22 July 2013 14:08 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.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 3481111E80D5 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:08:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.793
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.793 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.047, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_INFO=1.448, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iTTS5aLK94K2 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:08:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.yitter.info (ow5p.x.rootbsd.net [208.79.81.114]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9517E11E80AE for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:08:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.yitter.info (nat-08-mht.dyndns.com [216.146.45.247]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CD96E8A031 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:08:46 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 10:08:51 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20130722140850.GA41416@mx1.yitter.info>
References: <20130722024014.GA40429@mx1.yitter.info> <20130722025747.55027.qmail@joyce.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130722025747.55027.qmail@joyce.lan>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] [taugh.com-standards] Comments on draft-levine-orgboundary
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:08:59 -0000

On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 02:57:47AM -0000, John Levine wrote:

> You can use my grosse hackque with the wildcards, where the closest
> encloser rule finds the deepest relevant delegation point.

I really need to spend some more time working out scenarios of that,
because I'm not entirely sure it works in every case.  I'm not
entirely sure it _doesn't_, either, but I'm a little nervous about it.
I think the draft could benefit from some more examples in this area.

Best,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email