IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-weirds-bootstrap-00 and our lawn -- feedback?

Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us> Thu, 13 February 2014 11:45 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@hxr.us>
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 446D91A01F6 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 03:45:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
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 t9LI21NQrvX7 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 03:45:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pa0-f43.google.com (mail-pa0-f43.google.com [209.85.220.43]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2815D1A01B4 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 03:45:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id rd3so10638801pab.2 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 03:45:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=wMOUOmHf49xxZ8vUPx8kTVoiOVWOIQKHfmQG257HY+E=; b=J74OPLq6XnSRrZXZA5y4EywZBAPRWFxiHH2YDWilBT57coYWhyd8kvaCtaRG2P4nak rf5XBBZTg7iXrmlyySJAOZNZJAH3nTGzafJqRGK8b9pnIOAQsMJzg4OKrfMhmKZcc9i9 shY4vOjQ/f1lchgOdd+KocwLshjH6W/+TYP+BEoNt6UoEBwEeXGpSmTDpgjyGFLiiex8 9aI32Slfe//BD++V0X+qK7vgALHOcFZoBzXEK14BJLafTeeRQbnA0tgfdOS29gV9eur7 M/e6UKIot5BjYQu7/Se5bgnbz9v6m2hSze5L2bjjvbSRWbr9Vf3ql0ezoZoE+/VLrk4n 1Wlw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn9FWhgMKMw410XBjMpADYS5iYd3pD2OOTxBcjOgkNYlCcpLVly+4SvYkfdQX2SStnioDVI
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.202.8 with SMTP id ke8mr1272334pbc.86.1392291909813; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 03:45:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.68.143.4 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 03:45:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Originating-IP: [108.45.162.177]
In-Reply-To: <CAHBU6iua2Qv8kG9O2abme5eM6EZubMaOqm6pgpY0k2j8pCKmpg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20140211223250.68983.qmail@joyce.lan> <B1C114F7-5FA4-49F7-880F-9E94FCB24BFA@mnot.net> <CAHBU6ituZwwpu0LNHNK0R=XXY1Y88ovgu+THEPBf49sORaP0_A@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1402130024550.2177@joyce.lan> <CAHBU6iua2Qv8kG9O2abme5eM6EZubMaOqm6pgpY0k2j8pCKmpg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 06:45:09 -0500
Message-ID: <CAAQiQRfgRQytKwL3k1_3V6cj-s3tPAFD-2PheGHnK8bOidyd4A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us>
To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-weirds-bootstrap-00 and our lawn -- feedback?
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: <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: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 11:45:13 -0000

I don't understand this example. Doesn't it suppose that every web
application client, past, present, and future, uses templates? Since
that is not true and will never be true, this does not seem like a
valid point.

-andy

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:42 AM, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:
> Suppose my server comes with a package where I have to route endpoints based
> on URL parameters, so the WEIRDS requests come in to
> "https://example.com?service=weirds" so that's my registry value.
>
> In this case, appending /domain/whatever is going to result in a malformed
> URI reference, or at least one that's going to cause all the standard
> parsing libraries trouble.
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:25 PM, John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Speaking as a Web-centric sort of person and an Apps Area reviewer, if
>>> any
>>> further specs come forward that try to do a URI-space land-grab, I can
>>> promise you loud and sustained objections.
>>
>>
>> Same question.  I really don't see a plausible scenario where RDAP would
>> break anything.  Can you help us out with one?
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
>> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email