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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Phillip Hallam-Baker" <phill@hallambaker.com>
To: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: "General discussion of application-layer protocols"
<apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 5:44 AM

> I would prefer something shorter, how about /.well-known/phb/
>
> And since I would fill it with the well known services registry,
> shouldn't it be as short as possible. And isn't phb a little ego

Per Hop Behavior?

// is fine until it becomes /// or //// as in file://////  so I would
prefer something short and pronounceable rather than just // such as
/id/ /et/  etc

Tom Petch

> centric. I suggest /.well-known// That does exactly what I want (after
> canonicalization).
>
>
> Seriously, I am not buying the need to review here.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:34 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
wrote:
> > You can also register /.well-known/phks-protocols/ and do whatever
you like under it.
> >
> >
> >> On 14 Jan 2016, at 4:26 pm, Phillip Hallam-Baker
<phill@hallambaker.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> 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.
> >
> > --
> > Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss