Re: [dtn] [EXTERNAL] IANA section on bpbis

"Burleigh, Scott C (US 312B)" <> Tue, 22 October 2019 22:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CC19120122; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 15:23:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7w-690rbj6kS; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 15:23:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A72A1200FD; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 15:23:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd ( []) by ( with SMTP id x9MM9xu1033435; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 15:22:59 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=InSight1906; bh=tolDA9BLPV/7lXloh37SJKCeJE6unjQtAmStcYtPWOo=; b=yiRJ7ODBefMm43qeZgvqifJct/6DA846qxolz4XgzpW4fQCE7sz6E5sQdUfnn2qw9gbe OsVW7Rtd9nqamgeYF9qML2mc3cpRSOCfPZLEHuaZuuucNnjOp/w1OBRcl2s83X9h9+7S Z136gHYvTkhHe+Yh2qK5gfTma0fIQENzr8E3107CTbq1eUFOxZYfTRxd1L5eD+BU8t6V UN0xlBkutVRbjKG71lUiZOdmkT+Nc8HI5k8NZsgMl9wtonDn9nrLHxFCNzhS4pK83mF+ ZF7ZpiFnfvt8c4L6EZOQdFbt88l0k8K8h0bxrDyS8E6oEx5kmZdwKwe7B7FSBFVTBUg3 5g==
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTP id 2vswhmjr24-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 22 Oct 2019 15:22:59 -0700
Received: from ap-embx16-sp30.RES.AD.JPL ( []) by (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id x9MMMwGi016873 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128 bits) verified FAIL); Tue, 22 Oct 2019 15:22:58 -0700
Received: from ap-embx16-sp10.RES.AD.JPL (2002:8095:8953::8095:8953) by ap-embx16-sp30.RES.AD.JPL (2002:8095:8955::8095:8955) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1591.10; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 15:22:57 -0700
Received: from ap-embx16-sp10.RES.AD.JPL ([fe80::4:f430:47b5:767b]) by ap-embx16-sp10.RES.AD.JPL ([fe80::4:f430:47b5:767b%17]) with mapi id 15.01.1591.008; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 15:22:57 -0700
From: "Burleigh, Scott C (US 312B)" <>
To: Marc Blanchet <>
CC: DTN WG <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [EXTERNAL] IANA section on bpbis
Thread-Index: AQHViB9XpiW9uAr2TE6leMkJBRBKNKdnObgg
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 22:22:57 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Source-IP: []
X-AUTH: Authorized
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-10-22_06:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1908290000 definitions=main-1910220192
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dtn] [EXTERNAL] IANA section on bpbis
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Delay Tolerant Networking \(DTN\) discussion list at the IETF." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 22:23:03 -0000

Hi, Marc.  Thanks for putting so much time and care into these proposals.

You suggest that that section 10.6 should simply be removed because there is already a registry of URI schemes.  Certainly a registry of URI schemes exists, but numeric codes identifying those schemes are not part of that registry's definition.  Do you propose that we request that URI scheme type code (which BPbis requires) be added as another column of the URI schemes registry?  If not, how else would you propose that we proceed?

You are correct that the "dtn" URI scheme is already registered.  The purpose of adding that scheme definition in the BPbis specification is to provide a better reference, since the current reference is simply to RFC5050, which does not actually include any formal definition of the "dtn" scheme.  Are you saying that no formal definition of the "dtn" scheme is needed?

All of your other proposals seem fine to me.  Magnus, do you agree?


-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Blanchet <> 
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2019 7:54 AM
To:; Burleigh, Scott C (US 312B) <>
Cc: DTN WG <>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] IANA section on bpbis

Please find my comments on the IANA section of bpbis. PDF and txt to help see the comments.

Regards, Marc.