Return-Path: 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 74E4311E809D for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:53:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] 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 oDj2Wguk9kSK for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:53:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from av-tac-rtp.cisco.com (hen.cisco.com [64.102.19.198]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 196DB11E8091 for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:53:55 -0800 (PST) X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned Received: from chook.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-rtp.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pAINrrsk009416 for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2011 18:53:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from dhcp-64-102-209-148.cisco.com (dhcp-64-102-209-148.cisco.com [64.102.209.148]) by chook.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pAINrliX013238; Fri, 18 Nov 2011 18:53:47 -0500 (EST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-325--244156301 From: Gonzalo Salgueiro In-Reply-To: <047c01cca646$f32f8100$d98e8300$@packetizer.com> Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 18:53:47 -0500 Message-Id: <740878FD-AA49-4F62-8612-7AE76CA36710@cisco.com> References: <047c01cca646$f32f8100$d98e8300$@packetizer.com> To: "Paul E. Jones" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Webfinger & acct: draft X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 23:53:56 -0000 --Apple-Mail-325--244156301 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 I agree. Both the notion of registering link relations and the = possibility of a broader usage of the acct: URI beyond Webfinger really = require some group discussion to help us decide if the draft remains = self-contained as a single document or gets broken into several. Regards, Gonzalo On Nov 18, 2011, at 6:08 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: > Walter, > =20 > Thanks for your feedback on the text. I=92ll be revising the document = accordingly. Based on comments from you and others, section 4 will = likely undergo heavy restructuring :-) > =20 > For the webfinger link relations under webfinger.net, are those that = should go into the existing IANA registry for link relations that was = defined by RFC 5988? (See = http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xml) In = any case, registration of link relations can certainly be done as a part = of this specification or it could be done separately. My own opinion is = that it would be better to define link relations separately, but I=92m = willing to follow the group opinion on this one. Even I don=92t know = what those webfinger.net relations are :-) > =20 > Paul > =20 > From: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org = [mailto:apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Goix Laurent Walter > Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 6:34 AM > To: apps-discuss@ietf.org > Subject: [apps-discuss] Webfinger & acct: draft > =20 > Paul, all, > =20 > Thank you for starting addressing this standardization topic within = IETF. Webfinger (and acct:) indeed are being increasingly used and the = whole community would benefit from a well-referenced specification for = it. > =20 > Here are some comments on the draft: > - At this stage acct: scheme is needed from a formal point of = view only I guess, so there may not be the need for a full addr-spec = support. > - I also support the point raised by Mykyta around i18n. I = guess as we are targeting user addressing more than resource addressing = in general, and given the rise of Internet & social networks in = non-ascii countries it would be important to target a dual URI/IRI = scheme (following the path of the mailto rfc6068bis draft) > - If no other spec is currently using the acct: scheme then = it may be kept in the webfinger spec, but some existing specifications = may be interested in referencing it as primary/preferred addressing = mechanism (independently from webfinger), e.g. Opensocial, = activitystrea.ms > - =46rom a more structural point of view it may be useful to = better distinguish the sections related to the scheme from the ones = relates to webfinger. Right now 4.1 and 4.2 are very different in = purpose and may become 4 and 5. Current section 5 could become a = subsection of webfinger (say 5.2) > - It may also be good to distinguish the behavior on the = server side (creating/exposing the descriptor and its content) from the = actual discovery behavior from the client. > - Webfinger further uses specific link =93rels=94, which now = are referenced under webfinger.net domain. I guess some of these rels = would need to be registered as pure tokens (no URI), e.g. =93avatar=94, = =93profile-page=94 and specified in this spec. > - Reference 8 can now be updated to rfc6415 > =20 > Cheers > Walter > =20 > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Telecom Italia > Laurent-Walter Goix > Innovation & Industry Relations, Research & Prototyping, Future = Internet=20 > Piazza Einaudi 8 - 20124 Milano (Italy) > Tel. +39 026213445 > Mob. +39 3356114196 > Fax +39 0641869055 > =20 > =20 > Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente = alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione = derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente = vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete = cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di = provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. > This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain = privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. = Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. = If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and = any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. >=20 > Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non =E8 = necessario. > =20 > _______________________________________________ > apps-discuss mailing list > apps-discuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss --Apple-Mail-325--244156301 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252  I agree. Both the notion of registering link = relations and the possibility of a broader usage of the acct: URI beyond = Webfinger really require some group discussion to help us decide if the = draft remains self-contained as a single document or gets broken into = several.

Regards,

Gonzalo



On Nov 18, 2011, = at 6:08 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote:

Walter,
Thanks for your feedback on the text.  I=92ll = be revising the document accordingly.  Based on comments from you = and others, section 4 will likely undergo heavy restructuring = :-)
For the webfinger link relations under webfinger.net, are those that should go into the = existing IANA registry for link relations that was defined by RFC = 5988?  (See  webfinger.net relations are = :-)
Paul
 apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:apps-discuss-bounces@= ietf.org] On Behalf = Of Goix Laurent = Walter
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 = 6:34 AM
To:  [apps-discuss] Webfinger = & acct: draft
 
Paul, = all,
 
Thank you for starting addressing this standardization topic = within IETF. Webfinger (and acct:) indeed are being increasingly used = and the whole community would benefit from a well-referenced = specification for it.
 
Here are some comments on the draft:
- At this stage = acct: scheme is needed from a formal point of view only I guess, so = there may not be the need for a full addr-spec = support.
- I also = support the point raised by Mykyta around i18n.  I guess as we are = targeting user addressing more than resource addressing in general, and = given the rise of Internet & social networks in non-ascii countries = it would be important to target a dual URI/IRI scheme (following the = path of the mailto rfc6068bis draft)
- If no other = spec is currently using the acct: scheme then it may be kept in the = webfinger spec, but some existing specifications may be interested in = referencing it as primary/preferred addressing mechanism (independently = from webfinger), e.g. Opensocial, activitystrea.ms
- =46rom a more = structural point of view it may be useful to better distinguish the = sections related to the scheme from the ones relates to webfinger. Right = now 4.1 and 4.2 are very different in purpose and may become 4 and 5. = Current section 5 could become a subsection of webfinger (say = 5.2)
- It may also = be good to distinguish the behavior on the server side = (creating/exposing the descriptor and its content) from the actual = discovery behavior from the client.
- Webfinger = further uses specific link =93rels=94, which now are referenced = under webfinger.net domain. I guess some of = these rels would need to be registered as pure tokens (no URI), e.g. = =93avatar=94, =93profile-page=94 and specified in this = spec.
- Reference 8 = can now be updated to rfc6415
Cheers
Walter
 
Telecom Italia
Laurent-Walter = Goix
Innovation & Industry = Relations, Research & Prototyping, Future = Internet 
Piazza = Einaudi 8 - 20124 Milano (Italy)
Tel. +39 026213445
Mob. +39 = 3356114196
Fax +39 0641869055 
Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati = sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, = copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste = informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo = documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata = comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, = Grazie.

This e-mail and any = attachments is confidential and may = contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. = Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. = If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and = any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, = Thanks.

apps-discuss@ietf.org