Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme-01.txt

t.petch <ietfc@btconnect.com> Fri, 01 May 2015 11:38 UTC

Return-Path: <ietfc@btconnect.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 0409E1B2EB4 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 May 2015 04:38:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 5pli9R_2NxMk for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 May 2015 04:38:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from emea01-am1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-am1on0744.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fe00::744]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 631191B2D47 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 May 2015 04:38:01 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: kerwin.net.au; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;
Received: from pc6 (81.151.162.168) by DB3PR07MB060.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.242.137.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.148.16; Fri, 1 May 2015 11:37:39 +0000
Message-ID: <029301d08403$00aab460$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
From: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>
To: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>, IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
References: <20150414080648.20012.38227.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CACweHNCp0kkfAYNZ3yFrh18JOs8Aeb=tLhDjzbWu5E8yOR9nXw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 01 May 2015 12:32:00 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Originating-IP: [81.151.162.168]
X-ClientProxiedBy: HE1PR02CA0002.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com (25.162.33.12) To DB3PR07MB060.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.242.137.151)
X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DB3PR07MB060;
X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: <DB3PR07MB06020A5E7731F990AABD7B3A0D50@DB3PR07MB060.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:;
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:DB3PR07MB060; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DB3PR07MB060;
X-Forefront-PRVS: 0563F2E8B7
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(51704005)(51444003)(52044002)(13464003)(377424004)(55674003)(377454003)(24454002)(62966003)(77156002)(5001770100001)(5001960100002)(107886002)(33646002)(23676002)(50226001)(84392001)(81686999)(76176999)(81816999)(50986999)(47776003)(230783001)(40100003)(46102003)(122386002)(87976001)(66066001)(44716002)(62236002)(42186005)(19580395003)(15975445007)(19580405001)(14496001)(50466002)(61296003)(86362001)(77096005)(92566002)(1720100001)(74416001)(7726001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DB3PR07MB060; H:pc6; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
X-OriginatorOrg: btconnect.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 May 2015 11:37:39.0566 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB3PR07MB060
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/Z_DMpx1A0mVP8CabQWtLO0sFt78>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme-01.txt
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: <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: Fri, 01 May 2015 11:38:04 -0000

Matthew

eeeeeh what a lot of changes - could have done with a 'Changes from -00'
but no matter, I think that the changes are in the right direction,
moving a lot of the proprietary material to Appendices.

The only bit I missed was having the sample file:, valid and invalid,
more or less together but that is a minor consideration.

So yes, I think that the revised structure addresses my concerns.

I think, too, that the timing is nice w.r.t the recent discussions on
the registration of URI schemes!  I would reference that draft, not
RFC4395, assuming that that draft will be ready in time for this one:-).
It means, I think, that sections 7.3 and 7.4 apply and that you should
use the short form template and include it within the file I-D.  I tend
to look at what others have done recently and RFC7252 is such an
example, albeit under the old rules.

Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthew Kerwin" <matthew@kerwin.net.au>
To: "IETF Apps Discuss" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 11:38 AM


> Hi again folks,
>
> I managed to get a new version pushed out. It's not ready for
publication,
> but it should be ready for proper critique. Between -00 and -01 I
focused
> on addressing the broad thrust of the comments received so far,
notably:
>
> * cutting out everything but a central core from the normative syntax,
> moving the non-universal bits to optional appendices
>
> * less normative content and references, hopefully putting less burden
on
> implementers (especially those who are only mildly interested in
supporting
> the scheme)
>
> * putting a bit more effort into defining meaningful operations
>
> There are some obvious editorial issues, especially some incomplete
text in
> the appendices.  What I'd really appreciate advice on is:
>
> 1) whether the new structure broadly satisfies a bunch of the concerns
that
> have been raised, and
>
> 2) how to deal with the IANA Considerations section (especially
considering
> the uri-scheme-reg draft.) Back at draft-kerwin-file-scheme-11 it had
a
> fully fleshed out registration template, but somebody (I forget who,
sorry)
> suggested that I could replace it with the current (much terser) text.
> Which way should I go with it?
>
> I'm going to go back through the archives and see what remaining
concerns
> still apply, so I can create some issues in my github repository.
Please
> feel free to provide feedback and critique in the meantime.
>
> Cheers!
>
>
> On 14 April 2015 at 18:06, <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> > directories.
> >  This draft is a work item of the Applications Area Working Group
Working
> > Group of the IETF.
> >
> >         Title           : The file URI Scheme
> >         Author          : Matthew Kerwin
> >         Filename        : draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme-01.txt
> >         Pages           : 17
> >         Date            : 2015-04-14
> >
> > Abstract:
> >    This document specifies the "file" Uniform Resource Identifier
(URI)
> >    scheme, obsoleting the definition in RFC 1738.
> >
> >    It attemps to define a common core which is intended to
interoperate
> >    across the broad spectrum of existing implementations, while at
the
> >    same time documenting other current practices.
> >
> > Note to Readers (To be removed by the RFC Editor)
> >
> >    This draft should be discussed on the IETF Applications Area
Working
> >    Group discussion list <apps-discuss@ietf.org>.
> >
> >
> > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme/
> >
> > There's also a htmlized version available at:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme-01
> >
> > A diff from the previous version is available at:
> > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme-01
> >
> >
> > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> > submission
> > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> >
> > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > apps-discuss mailing list
> > apps-discuss@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
> >
>
>
>
> --
>   Matthew Kerwin
>   http://matthew.kerwin.net.au/
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------


> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>