Re: I-D Action:draft-duerst-iana-namespace-00.txt

Mark Nottingham <> Mon, 18 February 2008 20:31 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E22228C63A; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 12:31:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kVc37EEyex0X; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 12:31:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47E0128C67B; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 12:28:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86FFE28C675 for <>; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 12:28:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9aUYutVbLXji for <>; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 12:28:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ED8728C6F2 for <>; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 12:22:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] (unknown []) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFB8723E4B0; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 15:22:44 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <>
From: Mark Nottingham <>
To: Julian Reschke <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2)
Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-duerst-iana-namespace-00.txt
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 07:22:41 +1100
References: <> <> <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2)
Cc: Thomas Narten <>, Tim Bray <Tim.Bray@Sun.COM>, Apps Discuss <>, IANA <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: general discussion of application-layer protocols <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>


Personally, if I had to serve this traffic, I'd put a highly- 
concurrent Web server (e.g., Lighttpd) in place and build a one-second 
+ delay into serving those responses. Fine for human use, but will  
motivate software authors to find out why things suddenly got so slow...

Beyond that, question: how many IETF specs use a namespace URI as the  
primary means of identifying the format/protocol? As opposed to a  
media type. My suspicion is that the number is fairly small. If that's  
the case, I wonder if there's a need for these URIs to be resolvable.


On 19/02/2008, at 6:01 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I'm adding IANA and Thomas Narten (author of IANA considerations  
>> docs) to this thread to get early IANA feedback about this idea.   
>> It may well be a good idea, but we definitely want to think it  
>> through:
>> - A registry for HTTP URLs in the IANA domain
>>   ... including a HTML or XML document hosted by IANA on its  
>> Website at the location specified in the registered URL
>>  ... which means that end-users and developers will use these URIs,  
>> perhaps very frequently
>> What do we know about the W3 experience hosting namespace URIs with  
>> actual documents at the URIs?  I've been hearing rumours lately  
>> about something like this causing expensive levels of traffic, but  
>> I can't recall the details.
>> ...
> That was about DTDs (fetched by XML parsers), not namespace documents.
> BR, Julian

Mark Nottingham