IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] The acct: scheme question

John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com> Tue, 26 June 2012 15:12 UTC

Return-Path: <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.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 DD88621F84FC for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:12:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.407
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.407 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.191, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 fmyCHFHhk2rC for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:12:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gh0-f172.google.com (mail-gh0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B463021F8530 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:12:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ghbg16 with SMTP id g16so22421ghb.31 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:12:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to:x-mailer:x-gm-message-state; bh=AN/P6SJPYqGXzmGWwvMCtHzSYm6la+e/7Ba1zdHSz4o=; b=La1/VADtzzfChnctvb+35pggcQ1c+sRh3eyejWLyEr5Roebvtsd/7KoKLEhqeUm42j p4CzJWtab7dTP648sKNukWLd8N854fnj4zviDDwG3RVi1N5yDWz3woBjH64MyNAbnY7C Z/rK3REJagWgspqX+MpatQcfV8swzHM7khHbqZVy+8kCAlfU2W4iufk/w3PU0WXFGVrQ n53RO0DNZlSal6pWv2cFUankss703nyfsDrITu6lPbXmUs1fJi2XIj9kNMZw+bEy4UOo wQNB2iYHy29ckN74YSynL2Ta12Y+2TZnagY1C6irPdzNBbQ0EMcFzdbSQoKWU14jH8L+ 9Wvg==
Received: by 10.236.176.129 with SMTP id b1mr17865554yhm.126.1340723525114; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:12:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.34] (190-20-38-238.baf.movistar.cl. [190.20.38.238]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e5sm60385405ani.18.2012.06.26.08.12.02 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:12:04 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_2A19B1CF-AB4A-4A54-8EF7-16B4293FF264"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
From: John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FE9C9D4.5060106@stpeter.im>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 11:11:48 -0400
Message-Id: <49510B16-56BF-4445-8865-4FE3CF6ED99C@ve7jtb.com>
References: <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E00392812B6B6@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com> <CAKaEYhKpeayOw4sN4=NYaoXKJQ2e5P+pP8SqJqnt-=Barb=WqA@mail.gmail.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B168042967394366568E4F@TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4FE9BFF9.9060403@stpeter.im> <035988BC-A9BC-4397-8593-D5F84710ECF3@ve7jtb.com> <4FE9C9D4.5060106@stpeter.im>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl50719dRyjLThTRbJRAKOlsVP7aAPJ4NHnw5r3ommdcTXVd96kHh5bfCd9ddxICN6FQ909
Cc: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] The acct: scheme question
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: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 15:12:07 -0000

The "resource" parameter is currently a fully qualified URI, and that is normalized to acct:

The template paramater {uri} also precludes relative URI as near as I can tell.

Perhaps Paul can correct me,  but I think that the request.

GET /.well-known/host-meta.json?resource=foo@bar.com HTTP/1.1
Host: bar.com

Is not allowed by the spec, or be interoperable.    The goal of SWD was to make the above (slightly different syntax same idea) work.

There are a lot of places in the spec where the acct: uri and normalizing things to it are baked in.

There are likely also issues with host-meta as that is where the template is defined.

Paul's likely reaction will be that separating them is not trivial, and he may be correct in that.

On the other hand it is probably the right thing to do, even if it touches a bunch of things.

John B.

On 2012-06-26, at 10:40 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

> On 6/26/12 8:37 AM, John Bradley wrote:
> 
>> The current spec requires normalization of bare identifiers i.e. foo@bar.com to acct:foo@bar.com.
>> That would also need to change if we separate the specs.
> 
> In what way would it need to change?
> 
> Peter
> 
> -- 
> Peter Saint-Andre
> https://stpeter.im/
> 
> 
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email