Re: [apps-discuss] RFC 5785: Registration of .well-known services under HTTP to First Come

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 14, 2016, at 7:01 AM, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> wrote:
>>
>> Mark,
>>
>> On 1/14/16 6:34 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>> You can also register /.well-known/phks-protocols/ and do whatever you like under it.
>>
>> By your own words, that's simply not true unless there is a
>> specification tied to it, and personally I think that's a very high
>> bar.
>
> Why is it a high bar to require a written description of the identified
> space?  It doesn't require an IETF spec.  Mark is right -- if there is a
> spec of why the identifier exists, the owner can do anything with further
> identifiers under that space.  A review is desired because almost half of
> all proposed uses of .well-known are poorly conceived and more effectively
> accomplished with a single link.  But the review does not require consent.
>
> For example, PHB wants to do a standard name search of SRV after doing a
> DNS lookup and then use the SRV record to redirect to a reserved URI space.
> Sorry, that is brain-numbingly poor use of those protocols.

How about you apologize for the insult and try again?

You are certainly not expert enough in this space to be calling anyone
or their proposal mind numbingly stupid.

In fact it is precisely the attitude you are demonstrating here that
is the reason why I want to eliminate the registry troll from this
particular process.

No, being a designated expert is not an excuse to piss over other
people's proposals from a great height.

I will explain the reason for my architecture after you have apologized.

If the
> standard name is standard enough to use under .well-known, then it is
> standard enough to assign directly within DNS (just like www) by the
> same admin that would have crafted an SRV record, which saves two
> completely useless application redirects and a whole lot of ridiculous
> discussion on IETF registration lists.
>
> The discussion does not prevent a person from registering the space
> anyway, if they happen to be as stubborn as any one of us, but at least
> it gives us a record of why the identifier exists and maybe some legacy
> understanding of bad uses of that space.
>
> ....Roy
>
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss