Re: [apps-discuss] AppsDir review of draft-saintandre-urn-example

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Sat, 30 March 2013 15:20 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.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 4A4A521F874B; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 08:20:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.606
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.606 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.371, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 iJCnBwU-OEAY; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 08:20:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-f174.google.com (mail-vc0-f174.google.com [209.85.220.174]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFC0021F8735; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 08:20:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vc0-f174.google.com with SMTP id hx10so1252386vcb.33 for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 08:20:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Ns5fqiTzuIYhg3EtIGukdZaHn7ctN9KIxF3j7HK2SNg=; b=dXlZT/8RdJJTPmBtLNJEZWzLxOJWzULrWCaDm8N41sbn/Hgz/UE/HqXWNMBChBSc3v bSDpWQKmnZa8zC7b+JkadVgqWFiU6YUgKbQqgX5BGhyloi1o+bL2UYBOguo7Y1VJzTOm PiuRJbGEPo4yYJHMmlaGUuwpg7Ps4fm2pUXSIuZQEKdk/8k4AHcuC8d0fxcg7yBwMFOo MF4TzV35P4eowCQvR/iA3iNUQL2ioyG5gfuCeHwhtOP9GY3Y0IEaXnkza3MWc38eCy21 3T40GcKbrHc8dXMP8APl3OwTbN7JZcjVIRc7A2/ZSoBxa3RqNQap7E+LyDZ3AJ5YUyb+ TgBA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.52.24.229 with SMTP id x5mr3970763vdf.84.1364656841287; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 08:20:41 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com
Received: by 10.59.3.41 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 08:20:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5156641B.70302@stpeter.im>
References: <CAL0qLwbEgtAVbY-DK3O_e3qcKXTHdJAgeC4P86VK5sK7Wn06sQ@mail.gmail.com> <5156641B.70302@stpeter.im>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:20:41 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: LZj1AMyoOHLGrwIX4i9KuErWveo
Message-ID: <CAC4RtVA8WsP+OBq0Nc-Cu_XLraS6KQ4MO6YG_j5nJs3c15aV9A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, draft-saintandre-urn-example.all@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] AppsDir review of draft-saintandre-urn-example
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: Sat, 30 Mar 2013 15:20:43 -0000

> Would it be
> appropriate to add a sentence about that? For example, under Community
> Considerations:
>
>   Naturally, authorities for particular namespaces (say, the 'xmpp'
> NID) might want
>   to define their own sub-spaces for examples (say,
> urn:xmpp:example:*); however,
>   such policies are outside the scope of this document.

I'll stick that in as an RFC Editor note now.

>> In Section 1, you might also make reference to the RFC that
>> reserves some of the IP address space for examples.  It might be
>> RFC2606 or some other; apologies for not digging up the reference
>> myself, but I'm sending this from a place with no net access.
>
> Sure, that would be RFC 5737.

Why?  It already says this:

   Therefore this document registers
   a formal namespace identifier of "example", similar to "example.com"
   and other domain names [RFC2606].

What's the reason for *also* mentioning 5737?  The point is already
made, isn't it?

Barry