Re: [DNSOP] URI text for attrleaf?
Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Sat, 31 March 2018 16:32 UTC
Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 A7BA71267BB for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 31 Mar 2018 09:32:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.979
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dcrocker.net
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 VbaELwYsfxaM for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 31 Mar 2018 09:32:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5AD21242F7 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 31 Mar 2018 09:32:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-8-128.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.8.128]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id w2VGXbXi017009 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 31 Mar 2018 09:33:38 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dcrocker.net; s=default; t=1522514018; bh=0Q6zgBoqg7zKglq9povJFK6hYt6Zpgmn3wQ8YF3gEuw=; h=Subject:Cc:References:Reply-To:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=N8GhOld6Cw5xnQMLe3zj+hmvFxSFhzuO+weReG5EQ/24XX9c48peVBxQcVCjgbq8/ HBkzWLK0GXqd5/gIYYBau+5dX2wslJz/S+d9Fxr1eX+TkKxORrdQE0PdFLVbKoC/f8 zT01puxhiAlYNklEA+LusrUDb5bW746KNvmZmwbU=
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <152225104728.29861.12317860292894301994.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <81903d1e-ae7c-8955-8a55-b4f7383f02c4@dcrocker.net> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1803310916500.3351@ary.qy>
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <85aacf11-b7ea-0e29-ab86-73d221d1745a@dcrocker.net>
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2018 09:32:03 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1803310916500.3351@ary.qy>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/tLBYLF1nXMJb3B4Ob9r6FYLK4JQ>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] URI text for attrleaf?
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Sat, 31 Mar 2018 16:32:11 -0000
On 3/31/2018 9:08 AM, John R. Levine wrote: > On Fri, 30 Mar 2018, Dave Crocker wrote: >> but I can't figure exactly how, nor how to resolve drawing the global >> value from two independent namespaces... > >> But this ignores handling names from enumservice. >> Thoughts? Suggestion? Text? > > Add URI entries for all of the enumservices types, _acct, _email, _ems, > _fax, _ft, _h323, _iax, _ical-access, _ical-sched, _ifax, _im, _mms, > _pres, _pstn, _sip, _sms, _unifmsg, _vcard, _videomsg, _voice, > _voicemsg, _vpim, _web, _xmpp that point to RFC 7553. > > This has the hypothetical possibility that someone might define a > transport with a name the same as an enumservice type, but I think we're > into "don't do that" territory. That's simple and reasonable, but is it sufficient? Would some other folk comment, just to establish a wg tone on doing this? d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net
- [DNSOP] URI text for attrleaf? (was: Re: New Vers… Dave Crocker
- Re: [DNSOP] URI text for attrleaf? (was: Re: New … John R. Levine
- Re: [DNSOP] URI text for attrleaf? Dave Crocker