IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] Device URNs

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Thu, 23 February 2012 20:42 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
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 E41E521F88A6 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:42:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.673
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.673 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.074, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 oDQyar4KHepe for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:42:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CB6021F88A5 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:42:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from squire.local (unknown [64.101.72.114]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CAF1140058; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 13:53:32 -0700 (MST)
Message-ID: <4F46A4A5.9040500@stpeter.im>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 13:42:13 -0700
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
References: <4F463F5C.7020104@piuha.net> <4F4685DC.6080801@stpeter.im> <4F46861E.6030001@stpeter.im> <4F4695FB.5090607@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <4F4695FB.5090607@piuha.net>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.5
OpenPGP: url=https://stpeter.im/stpeter.asc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Device URNs
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: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 20:42:16 -0000

On 2/23/12 12:39 PM, Jari Arkko wrote:

> But I could be missing something, of course.

I think you were missing the point of my message: that administered
uniqueness is not necessary, so urn:dev:cgi is OK.

And yes, eventually it would be good for you to post about this I-D to
the urn-nid mailing list:

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn-nid

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email