IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] HTTPSSVC/SVCB bikeshed: poll for what to name them

Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org> Wed, 20 November 2019 09:04 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 065DA1208D9 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 01:04:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Wl4tkV0s82Dq for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 01:04:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from straasha.imrryr.org (straasha.imrryr.org [100.2.39.101]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76C211208D5 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 01:04:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by straasha.imrryr.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 53A33331CF7; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 04:04:06 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 04:04:06 -0500
From: Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20191120090406.GT34850@straasha.imrryr.org>
Reply-To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <CAKC-DJiuE0Gmt5kMz8UJbZ625hdeMZLih3CCg1FQKx92D79oLw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAKC-DJiuE0Gmt5kMz8UJbZ625hdeMZLih3CCg1FQKx92D79oLw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/RSx0b_h_sF2GiR6NUsGukFMYym4>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] HTTPSSVC/SVCB bikeshed: poll for what to name them
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 09:04:09 -0000

On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 09:55:26PM -0500, Erik Nygren wrote:

> It is time to finalize names for HTTPSSVC and SVCB. Following a thread
> on the DNSOP list that Tommy started, I created a poll incorporating
> some of the ideas.  After we get some feedback here, the WG chairs and
> authors will pick a set to propose and see if we can get consensus.
> Here is a poll to fill out listing some of the suggestions listed so
> far for each of HTTPSSVC and SVCB:
> 
>    https://forms.gle/HBE5e4QFgUjKHvVy7

My proposal:

1. SVCB  ->  SRVLOC

   Service location, less cryptic than SVCB, and manifestly a
   generalization of SRV.

2. HTTPSSVC  ->  HTTPLOC

   HTTP location, manifestly a variant of the generic service location,
   with HTTP in the name.

Definitely agree on the need for a single lexeme, these names end up as
enum names in various programming languages.

-- 
    Viktor.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email