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

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Mon, 02 July 2012 16:20 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 7559321F8716 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Jul 2012 09:20:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.164
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.164 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.165, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_44=0.6, 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 YxbRvc0ubyCV for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Jul 2012 09:20:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2B4421F870A for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Jul 2012 09:20:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [64.101.72.115] (unknown [64.101.72.115]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0BA954005A; Mon, 2 Jul 2012 10:38:38 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <4FF1CA48.7090609@stpeter.im>
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 10:20:24 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
References: <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E00392812B6B6@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com> <1340723227.60315.YahooMailNeo@web31801.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B168042967394366568FF8@TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <043201cd54a5$79f2e170$6dd8a450$@packetizer.com> <CAKaEYhL0NS=RZXTdyOMBM_q15P7D1KZ9kgUyMYYB06kA9f0w8Q@mail.gmail.com> <4FEC3B4F.80607@ninebynine.org> <4FEC8BF0.6070605@stpeter.im> <4FEFBF51.5000905@stpeter.im> <1341157111.65669.YahooMailNeo@web31805.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4FF0C90D.2060207@stpeter.im> <4FF18C30.2040902@ninebynine.org> <CAMm+LwgVKKHOTMnzLAnxvXFjb=F+e5acdk12fO5Nj-DjUq5uHQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKaEYhJdbYN4O3GbBYw=mxe3GBL8q51w3YnkR2Y4=1Tn0ztCOA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMm+LwgazJL2rQjNhnGHgw3kYnR21--RzZ6pWVG5YjVabogRKQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B168042967394366572961@TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4FF1C3B5.4090902@stpeter.im> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B1680429673943665729B6@TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B1680429673943665729B6@TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>, "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: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 16:20:21 -0000

On 7/2/12 9:54 AM, Mike Jones wrote:
> It's done a lot - it's one of the primary applications of the
> "localhost" name.  I suppose we could define acct:user@localhost, but
> that seems like more of a hack than just allowing acct:user.

So if you want to access one of these non-Internet-connected hosts using
HTTP, you would specify a URI of "http:///"? That's crazy talk. :)

I really don't see a good reason to make the hostname optional -- it
just introduces unnecessary complexity.

Peter

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