IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dispatch] Tiny update to RFC 3405

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Tue, 09 June 2020 20:56 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D69003A086C for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 13:56:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.401
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.276, MAY_BE_FORGED=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=nostrum.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K-swPQPTn9Kw for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 13:56:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 246EB3A0921 for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 13:56:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bens-macbook.lan (mta-70-120-123-175.stx.rr.com [70.120.123.175] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 059Kub5U038889 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 9 Jun 2020 15:56:38 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1591736199; bh=zjJOqEFIrciDnDY9iiiKIAv4HSinuMtIEwjispMqHk0=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=v/VgTPZerZsmNtUQ3Jdxbo6OXESuBEmrU/nLlNrwgjShkVHhxRJi5tejGQ80iQ7pJ BfEUNmE22NzJCKNQqL96Ps+kp8tte8xJlVpxHNVk7hyUBRkb4czLtehwQmemDi+If1 B9KJPXyODgBYninZViEgWEJpCucAL9ymZkjeugPQ=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host mta-70-120-123-175.stx.rr.com [70.120.123.175] (may be forged) claimed to be bens-macbook.lan
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Message-Id: <C045DE44-BDF7-4480-B3FD-D620ABE7C805@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_463A8557-AA4E-47E6-9837-883957452DFC"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2020 15:56:30 -0500
In-Reply-To: <71571b9b-4bbd-47bb-c6db-bf0b91ef5a53@nostrum.com>
Cc: Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, Dispatch WG <dispatch@ietf.org>
To: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
References: <CA+9kkMC2dFjvgEWKDDqThF3jJipcZeP4ZTofvhQ0oAx7NvB7tg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOdDvNo36eOKn0ZWi67LeO_YEhTJoj=U0uBh02b9aD3RdggE+A@mail.gmail.com> <71571b9b-4bbd-47bb-c6db-bf0b91ef5a53@nostrum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/oS_izTXE9d1s8zwB3LCNACxJR3k>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] Tiny update to RFC 3405
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2020 20:56:52 -0000

Does anyone disagree with Robert’s recommendation for DISPATCH to recommend this become AD sponsored?

Thanks!

Ben.

> On Jun 5, 2020, at 2:02 PM, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> wrote:
> 
> I don't think there's work to do here that Ted's not already done - the draft looks ready to IETF LC. My preference would be to dispatch this to an AD to sponsor it, and let it go.
> 
> RjS
> 
> On 6/4/20 7:08 PM, Patrick McManus wrote:
>> does the group have any thoughts on what the appropriate dispatch for Ted's work (below) would be?
>> 
>> We certainly can do this outside of a list if there is participation and rough consensus.. would be good to build that skill in this remote-only period, right?
>> 
>> -Patrick
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 7:13 PM Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com <mailto:ted.ietf@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Howdy,
>> 
>> This is one the shortest drafts I've ever written:  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hardie-dispatch-rfc3405-update/ <https://datatracker.ietf..org/doc/draft-hardie-dispatch-rfc3405-update/> .   Basically, RFC 3405 used to require that registrations in URI.ARPA be from the "IETF Tree".  That tree was deprecated after the document was published.  As it happens, there are very few registrations in URI.ARPA, so we did not catch it and fix it before now.  
>> 
>> This draft updates RFC 3405 to require "permanent" scheme registrations.  The salient bit is this:
>> 
>> All registrations in URI.ARPA MUST be for schemes which are permanent
>>    registrations, as they are described in BCP 35.
>> 
>> I'm hoping for a quick dispatch of this, but happy to discuss.
>> 
>> regards,
>> 
>> Ted Hardie
>> _______________________________________________
>> dispatch mailing list
>> dispatch@ietf.org <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> dispatch mailing list
>> dispatch@ietf.org <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> dispatch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email