IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au> Fri, 15 January 2016 23:26 UTC

Return-Path: <phluid61@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 106981B33B9 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:26:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.027
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.027 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 V2SuwpTWWRAm for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:26:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qg0-x22b.google.com (mail-qg0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4276E1B33B6 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:26:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qg0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id 6so441128497qgy.1 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:26:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=iT68fnxajWFa/vTcSi66lsj8rY0xCuDhtshkdeBvpFE=; b=XieMo0XwhTVVlaY0icTSPIJ1cb9Xqxsd8qkDYblmEwooqdOYkR+L3lkWGw926FvU9j ksFoXaErAV4eJxT/ymGzIoA/LZdUdOEWdPxIUBAjr69Be1uGbjTzxK4xSPROJV/JK8vx 7W5GwT1xHXF+ucl0I9d4UavzmnmvacGVogFzB5g31p5El7+o1JWF3IZaJnEkmqAt948a NqDrJYusOmJy7pATZkGTT/z3c1hQz5tgSZyDj6P0oe5uz+HBMZCmj6W/kP60JLxLd4Wm 5jl5NvRQj7GBDCK9WYJu11nYbUOWHR22YJypKXyhQ9lYoSz8378/wZsuOIISNPPeT2B2 nrhA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=iT68fnxajWFa/vTcSi66lsj8rY0xCuDhtshkdeBvpFE=; b=e0mOrNXsqqdLaEWDfhkKxhta8PIfk5VEml6IDNFxjYiduCUNiTC0FcT84lu05rf9Jg K3XuQdB2DxgX6HWtquzqNL71GQ/ZxR3b/mNxauywMW+avPPCNrOD0kqHUJWn0mXu+dBp uewA3EHCPWOkiKqM5TA+7D1ONRP2WTrelvXNpcem4vlNh5bB+PMEEcIyk0CZDrmsrkzO vsWFfCs12va2xVr6wJuznOKU7lDAOIMiTXhfSmEMekK66sf2F0kdkNIjPhwUt5Wiv3Gh FLKEULov0gKM+KuxCRf9pXSL0k1nvVf/9pSfWQ980FA//l4XwI3QNjSW9jkHrufpASB2 aBWw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlgTjpactWIfsyY+pLox9a8i3NPTMPl3CTaGqqGCK0twJNA2Z8YWkeUFHBNlBZIFp2IDUguSAP4R3I5EYxyRto5pc1ILQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.140.93.166 with SMTP id d35mr16584812qge.29.1452900412526; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:26:52 -0800 (PST)
Sender: phluid61@gmail.com
Received: by 10.55.155.2 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:26:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.55.155.2 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:26:52 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+Lwgw+p+Eqagf1Uio+wQjLnz_KRj4nmraLRH7PA5Cwa=yvw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMm+Lwj=A+KbxOvxFrURZmTmYJuGD3rXvnRToLZ_L+v-Qv_L_w@mail.gmail.com> <F87BF4D5-98EB-4476-B07B-969BEF842EE2@mnot.net> <CAMm+LwiT+bATrwK4guD6qtqPBDiOkXqUeF4+jjLJoP5TYqi3_w@mail.gmail.com> <E5435AB2-4830-4C08-AC3D-AE1FB6E66C53@mnot.net> <5697B833.3000703@cisco.com> <CAMm+LwiDJXwqMXmNcksTJeh0sn6_rvsGdnGu6-KtDcdGy1Wbvg@mail.gmail.com> <007301d14fa8$05d15540$1173ffc0$@gmail.com> <CAMm+Lwgw+p+Eqagf1Uio+wQjLnz_KRj4nmraLRH7PA5Cwa=yvw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2016 09:26:52 +1000
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 6oGTFJrdvaD9Iyg7fJT9lM13rEc
Message-ID: <CACweHNAAjoZ-FCV2vqD5kwmaD893OpGfJ+b+FOXjuDYW68f4Jg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11395a22fb95bc052967bc2b"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/W5glTVURGhz3s-SBc8K9JU0_nn4>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] RFC 5785: Registration of .well-known services under HTTP to First Come
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 23:26:56 -0000

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.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email