[core] Resource Directory: Usage of pre -17 groups and advanced 6690 features

Christian Amsüss <christian@amsuess.com> Mon, 05 November 2018 10:00 UTC

Return-Path: <christian@amsuess.com>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A57F51277BB for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 02:00:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qpPAmpn1LvU8 for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 02:00:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from prometheus.amsuess.com (alt.prometheus.amsuess.com [IPv6:2a01:4f8:190:3064::3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 082EE130F0E for <core@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 02:00:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from poseidon-mailhub.amsuess.com (095129206250.cust.akis.net []) by prometheus.amsuess.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0B9A41E9D for <core@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 11:00:11 +0100 (CET)
Received: from poseidon-mailbox.amsuess.com (unknown [IPv6:2a02:b18:c13b:8010:a800:ff:fede:b1bf]) by poseidon-mailhub.amsuess.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 065AD10A for <core@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 11:00:11 +0100 (CET)
Received: from hephaistos.amsuess.com (hephaistos.amsuess.com [IPv6:2a02:b18:c13b:8010::f08]) by poseidon-mailbox.amsuess.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ADE705B for <core@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 11:00:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: (nullmailer pid 25773 invoked by uid 1000); Mon, 05 Nov 2018 10:00:10 -0000
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 11:00:10 +0100
From: Christian =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ams=FCss?= <christian@amsuess.com>
To: Core WG mailing list <core@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20181105100010.GA19849@hephaistos.amsuess.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ew6BAiZeqk4r7MaW"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/dInliXlEbbGPB0T_7ipDn-4IJTU>
Subject: [core] Resource Directory: Usage of pre -17 groups and advanced 6690 features
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2018 10:00:17 -0000

Hello CoRE group,

I'd like to repeat the questions to the group from today's meeting to
the list for confirmation of the planned course of the Resource
Directory document:

* Is there any active or deployed work that relies on groups as they
  described before -17, ie. that needs the RD to store which endpoints
  (actually: endpoint registrations) are members of the group?

* Are there active users of RFC6690 features that go beyond what is
  described in the examples? In particular, do you use any of

  * References are relative but do not start with a slash?
  * Relative references in the target, and full URIs in the anchor?
  * Links where the precise link context ("the anchor") is relevant even
    though the anchor attribute is not given?

If so, please let me know during this week. The room gave two "no"s,
based on which RD should be able to progress to a WGLC document swiftly.


To use raw power is to make yourself infinitely vulnerable to greater powers.
  -- Bene Gesserit axiom