Re: [apps-discuss] Webfinger & acct: draft
"Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> Fri, 18 November 2011 23:08 UTC
Return-Path: <paulej@packetizer.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 4F55721F84A5 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:08:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.419, BAYES_05=-1.11, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SARE_GIF_ATTACH=1.42]
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 aRZzRnwiggKQ for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:08:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BA9121F84A1 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:08:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id pAIN8RNj024181 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 18 Nov 2011 18:08:29 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1321657710; bh=bHXA6tb/w3RY84/eMnvNd0+fKr6DAq3IdhF9x3uuhrI=; h=From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=NujVmjGwtZk4jCgCVeKfo5dBx8JLiugLDIcRDBl550vDp26YACc9ZAx84vS3d0DlP JAo46TOhG4tCW1BPe/Wl6t6Ua6YIaAMrjJtNJKiv3d8nOiVZVGzIVb9XeK9wHYUYTA CfHVrps8DzflG83c92rZI82VflS1SufLmsnZ7Szk=
From: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
To: 'Goix Laurent Walter' <laurentwalter.goix@telecomitalia.it>, apps-discuss@ietf.org
References: <A09A9E0A4B9C654E8672D1DC003633AE4056F73E86@GRFMBX704BA020.griffon.local>
In-Reply-To: <A09A9E0A4B9C654E8672D1DC003633AE4056F73E86@GRFMBX704BA020.griffon.local>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 18:08:11 -0500
Message-ID: <047c01cca646$f32f8100$d98e8300$@packetizer.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_047D_01CCA61D.0A5BEA00"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQIL4OqBz9QyEd+IvRAI24Ft4P15EZU0yWdw
Content-Language: en-us
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 <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: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 23:08:34 -0000
Walter, Thanks for your feedback on the text. Ill 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 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 Im willing to follow the group opinion on this one. Even I dont know what those webfinger.net relations are :-) Paul 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 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 - From 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 rels, 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. avatar, profile-page 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. rispetta l'ambienteRispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non è necessario.
- [apps-discuss] Webfinger & acct: draft Goix Laurent Walter
- Re: [apps-discuss] Webfinger & acct: draft Paul E. Jones
- Re: [apps-discuss] Webfinger & acct: draft Gonzalo Salgueiro
- Re: [apps-discuss] Webfinger & acct: draft Blaine Cook
- Re: [apps-discuss] Webfinger & acct: draft Mykyta Yevstifeyev (М. Євстіфеєв)
- Re: [apps-discuss] Webfinger & acct: draft Blaine Cook
- [apps-discuss] R: Webfinger & acct: draft Goix Laurent Walter