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

John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com> Mon, 02 July 2012 03:56 UTC

Return-Path: <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>
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 57BD111E814F for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Jul 2012 20:56:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.149
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_64=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 OvqNAk7E0xYN for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Jul 2012 20:56:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gg0-f172.google.com (mail-gg0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6948D11E813D for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 1 Jul 2012 20:56:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ggnc4 with SMTP id c4so4219350ggn.31 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 01 Jul 2012 20:56:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to:x-mailer:x-gm-message-state; bh=rGdKb7kJBJcVuBGQA35PJVvPZ0cESY/UdwC7W/4jOdA=; b=MBUYsvAsFAA7fmlL8nJASTbvTY8fR3Hb+A/D6MaqZ6eWo0FmEZaAron5qtG6SIUXx/ Aohru9s2olpg6D8Xni96xtWRgPhCfw8AhAn6GhojbdnTFj9YsOSRARVUFrM3HPMqj+ky aCBaItZKu9PxW0hnVcf1e2hKa9DVRMz55jlsTclR78n8tScphtlMGEUvoZXfAcO/YICi i/xbU8Bbbd9w/Vylg47VQaMkqpTLm7n54YdiKZw7KNzsC9SS4fiOxHZPoGYU6Izon1Du 36GCRpfdFjlSG33ZNUQ83y86CfPhKGIooML0RP0D16/CWGQDAMUHFosxat9Zehjv2aR1 G/JQ==
Received: by 10.236.78.36 with SMTP id f24mr13877443yhe.20.1341201374065; Sun, 01 Jul 2012 20:56:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.211] (190-20-50-6.baf.movistar.cl. [190.20.50.6]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y66sm22632030yhi.10.2012.07.01.20.56.10 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 01 Jul 2012 20:56:12 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A298D10E-F2AA-404F-B1E5-52DB41CAA236"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
From: John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FF11620.8040901@stpeter.im>
Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2012 23:56:05 -0400
Message-Id: <20503F9B-B87D-4983-A689-52755731AD0F@ve7jtb.com>
References: <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E00392812B6B6@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com> <CAKaEYhKpeayOw4sN4=NYaoXKJQ2e5P+pP8SqJqnt-=Barb=WqA@mail.gmail.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B168042967394366568E4F@TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.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> <1341189869.28404.YahooMailNeo@web31802.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4FF11620.8040901@stpeter.im>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlI1+O6XUMTF/0YzAYd0j7+kNZXAglg1EP89jd/ujqVCQ81MimvJpYjGrlcx+e/GlEU5m0+
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 03:56:11 -0000

WF resolution won't work without a domain to provide the root of discovery.  

While it might be inferred from contact to create the URI.  

Also the WF target server may be supporting multiple domains so a user name on its own would not be a good pattern.

If we are doing acct: it should have a mandatory domainpart.

John B.
On 2012-07-01, at 11:31 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

> On 7/1/12 6:44 PM, William Mills wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
>>> To: William Mills <wmills@yahoo-inc.com>
>>> Cc: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>; "apps-discuss@ietf.org"
>> <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Murray S. Kucherawy <msk@cloudmark.com>
>>> Sent: Sunday, July 1, 2012 3:02 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] The acct: scheme question
>>> 
>>> On 7/1/12 9:38 AM, William Mills wrote:
>>>> As susquepedalian as I frequently am, I would change 'discussants'
>>> in
>>>> section 2 to "working group".
>>> 
>>> Those discussions far predated any consideration at the IETF.
>>> 
>>>> section 3 para 3 "It is not assumed that an entity will necessarily
>>>> be able to interact with a user's account using any particular
>>>> application protocol, such as email...", I understand this but email
>>>> isn't a protocol, SMTP is for example.  Maybe change "email"
>>> to SMTP
>>>> there?
>>> 
>>> Sure.
>>> 
>>>> Section 4.3:  '"@" domainpart' should be optional. 
>>> It's reasonable
>>>> to think this might be used with local account identifiers that
>>>> don/t/need have a domain.
>>> 
>>> Making the domain name of the service provider implicit seems
>>> ill-advised to me. What's the harm of including the domainpart?
>> 
>> I just think it's something that won't be needed in some cases.
> 
> With all due respect, I think your suggestion is nonsensical. If I work
> at example.com and I want to send an email message to my co-worker Bill,
> is the URI for me mailto:bill instead of mailto:bill@example.com (as it
> would be for someone working at example.net)?
> 
> Peter
> 
> -- 
> Peter Saint-Andre
> https://stpeter.im/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss