IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [regext] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Thu, 09 April 2020 13:34 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E01CE3A0B2A; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 06:34:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.403
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.403 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.248, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 v7y8GhBMEMoq; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 06:34:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-il1-f178.google.com (mail-il1-f178.google.com [209.85.166.178]) (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 DAE5A3A0B27; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 06:34:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-il1-f178.google.com with SMTP id t11so10204644ils.1; Thu, 09 Apr 2020 06:34:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=L6+fZLjOG9WKK3u+nB7yKcqxEiLw3Xu0JYkYPGvMtUU=; b=ig5bq2seeTnHcsxITsLS22c00odUADHYZsvzqjAhGbTYtMK82obcvHlFXT+yzfM1NV 9O6kaNflUBXL3qnLCzjA++N7key8Iy9wTBbizhOYMtVsvoN2fB2jV1o1cE94zpwbnxbW 2GP+V8oDz41MAMCJJqoAPQF4BTLJExNlF7N4CBtadd/dZ8nOE0022g8g47wLIPkAGbfp 3N8mGp4k9RMBBAEjq62hWSpvpSzIhbJb0j6hoIotzfAYd6OovWSQmd7qecLZKd2/lotY W2wMlnPr3iwFfJTeVlwccxJo+oyPT7iCRpe+Z6tYixj+raq45E3vGSboSjssTiz6WqGx EW0w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZnTmPnn4RX9JurW+CskwHbYMrMXRORW18NZRIkuPkahI66lAef VpPyvewnWfENvjHzNR+BeIrDc/4x6Y0Tu0jKX00=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKYZGiJAOJLsc2rlE5GBLUySM/hTieDohrAUWpDO8eNQbL16A8vOaJaLaLuRXr24bJHqa9PIaqrJy67nR2tMyw=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:9107:: with SMTP id t7mr5121150ild.140.1586439288901; Thu, 09 Apr 2020 06:34:48 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <158636167278.24432.4833820670236901134@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <158636167278.24432.4833820670236901134@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 09:34:38 -0400
Message-ID: <CALaySJKvFD_ZLKe9f8qsz+rOwj-mMqsy_rEbNwBVyvPAfoXg1g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, regext-chairs <regext-chairs@ietf.org>, "Gould, James" <jgould@verisign.com>, regext <regext@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/q7ky_4H2m1tW-4rIstFccvEvHBY>
Subject: Re: [regext] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: regext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Registration Protocols Extensions <regext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/regext/>
List-Post: <mailto:regext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 13:34:52 -0000

> Is it appropriate to use the urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:rdeObj[N] namespaces
> in the examples, vs. a dedicated "example" namespace?

You're probably right: there is an "example" namespace, and when a URN
is used purely as an example it should use that namespace.

Barry

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email