Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-acct-uri-05.txt

"Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> Tue, 02 July 2013 16:28 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 32BDE21F9E21 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jul 2013 09:28:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 ho7UYoxKWIVw for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jul 2013 09:28:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02E8621F9E8A for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jul 2013 09:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
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 r62GScBe023704 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 2 Jul 2013 12:28:38 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1372782518; bh=76Wke0yFw0tQKNKDOSm7p8YLoqSALMr4XS7TJvGw+a8=; h=From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=rQc4fWXL8tP7SFJtwpznKHEtbsgFnWEeC3BO9/BkC0jLQQjhbwK2RjqzMikl5UF4C WJyPRPXXOabw0Gqvx+ecShfVaQgBwtehT9yyk12kapiL/WxeK+ttdoOz3DCjQfrpsn 9xrl295oVFTRHphZn3RQ07Kuh86OsntlPcpRwPVY=
From: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
To: 'Markus Lanthaler' <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>, apps-discuss@ietf.org
References: <20130617205341.15641.96770.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <51BF786B.9060703@stpeter.im> <016d01ce767f$2ea45990$8bed0cb0$@lanthaler@gmx.net> <51D1C423.5000804@stpeter.im> <017801ce7686$afc9db60$0f5d9220$@lanthaler@gmx.net> <044d01ce76c4$4f133710$ed39a530$@packetizer.com> <010901ce7702$ba7283b0$2f578b10$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
In-Reply-To: <010901ce7702$ba7283b0$2f578b10$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2013 12:29:10 -0400
Message-ID: <05aa01ce7741$48378220$d8a68660$@packetizer.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQJV0E+HeqM9oFCI0wWnOEzauIjbLQFZvmQ1AgGRSyQChFqCswFTtRQ8AeGiO6sCtZA7WpfkjAwA
Content-Language: en-us
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-acct-uri-05.txt
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: Tue, 02 Jul 2013 16:28:46 -0000

Markus,

> On Tuesday, July 02, 2013 3:35 AM, Paul E. Jones wrote:
> > Wherever the acct URI is used, I would assume a human initially provided
> the
> > URI (directly or indirectly via a simple "user@domain" entry).  How
> would
> > the human user know any date associated with an account?
> 
> I'm not so sure about that, but in any case, why not simply use the
> current
> date when the user enters the acct URI? That way the system would know
> once
> for all that the user meant the account that was valid at that point in
> time.

If you want the end user to enter the current date, there is no need: the
system could provide that.  However, end users are not usually performing an
account verification.  They're querying for information or sending an email
or something. 


> > Having a date as a part of any user identifier might help, but it is a
> > little difficult for the average person to use.  Could you imagine if
> all
> > account IDs looked like paulej.20130701@packetizer.com?
> 
> What about paulej@packetizer.com?date=20130701
> 
> Is that still too difficult? The date wouldn't have to be necessary
though.
> A user can simply type in paulej@packetizer.com and the system adds the
> current date automatically.

You want to change the format of the email URI, too?

Paul