IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> Thu, 14 January 2016 05:26 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@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 D7F781A90A0 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 21:26:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.278
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=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 lXIHoTkWJdqk for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 21:26:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-x234.google.com (mail-wm0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::234]) (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 978DA1A886D for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 21:26:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm0-x234.google.com with SMTP id l65so322738015wmf.1 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 21:26:04 -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:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Z/VfROVy5+g2xzfWUbQFXfEa4l7G1VhML72F0uuowZs=; b=emF+KOfgVbKv6LxbzonKwnk0VxxMTnsIHs364ZbO5xIp3QwuhXBJEIfls+n7iIqzCf 4akp3TKIgxNuWmElJx9ak02AIcb0hJr6OY+AYDijVbQGC4He7+0WHAoxWJAF+K7j8Mp+ wsx51PqgQIqs/YFD9KKP1O6rvLI6WSUpUrIEl8D53fp2vmbkg6TDyGR1rolhnjVs8Krs njgiM6u5i+suCa336NCbADtkB/KohefuZBNM58okQNVbpFJzkZW7Z2IDYKUrnmDI4/Sj NQDjO0/XXl7+2+6D/wzRteRgHJ6aUn6JRM3AI04lptbP2vpOpQCPC8OIbmZKnnORK44/ Vsnw==
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:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Z/VfROVy5+g2xzfWUbQFXfEa4l7G1VhML72F0uuowZs=; b=HJPFcyBNvqGdcFCCajMMJ2dNmLq8FfSIFNAMKs9/adq/p7CI5mHV8Aq15qwAa6+pYY 9uNMyxRFV/F8K9x8rod9FSVlBtVG8gBvbqr1ATld7kGSePT0plI6cbGUS/VX4ofkbalO ZryQ7mSjyVXU36qH3G35fA1+AyWDWcEtd3DVzPuaqR2fYhYzMMLC/D6QZR9eoaaP169F aoPPHjvq4md6aRcN7kSVYJTgdUtdVCns5U5Eps4YxDYw0oQ0kM76gbhYL6V8L1+GDiqB +y+VGgbmQFI+x/ESa/stbe9DIbIHt/JnLUU7nMS8LuOLTOWx+R/xwJ2FscKRhcrlQju4 SLlw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlGM+3aYh1bUWlzdEaecUBJfXeIMelsEd62OhVU/wzDcfnU0GEi6TGw+ReRgmx/JgW0J1FG9biTPT2V4FclDyZPQbw46g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.25.168.15 with SMTP id r15mr508550lfe.166.1452749163203; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 21:26:03 -0800 (PST)
Sender: hallam@gmail.com
Received: by 10.112.1.33 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Jan 2016 21:26:03 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <F87BF4D5-98EB-4476-B07B-969BEF842EE2@mnot.net>
References: <CAMm+Lwj=A+KbxOvxFrURZmTmYJuGD3rXvnRToLZ_L+v-Qv_L_w@mail.gmail.com> <F87BF4D5-98EB-4476-B07B-969BEF842EE2@mnot.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 00:26:03 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: ic2d7hdvhr6R0Tk4vHoDSA7k0SM
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwiT+bATrwK4guD6qtqPBDiOkXqUeF4+jjLJoP5TYqi3_w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/foSEkHiuE5tu5_ZLAyg88QK3FsM>
Cc: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
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: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 05:26:06 -0000

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> SRV isn't used by HTTP, so I'm not seeing a strong motivation for aligning the policies. Given that .well-known is a mechanism for allocating a URL on *every* Web server on the planet, and that space is ceded to standard uses by server authorities (the actual owners of that name space), having a higher bar to entry than FCFS seems like a good idea.

SRV is used for discovery of many Web Services. The obvious pattern being:

1) Resolve the DNS address to a host using the SRV record

2) Use the .well-known convention to identify the service endpoint on
the specified host.

I do not see the logic in your assertion that space is being reserved
on every Web server on the planet. That was already done when
.well-known was allocated in the first place. The question now being
how to best prevent conflicts within that space.

Having to pass through a review to get a code point allocation is
empirically the least effective way of avoiding conflict.

Since I have a code generator I can simply write something into the
tool to generate the request for the code point allocation and send it
to the registry review expert but I suspect that would not be
appreciated.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email