Re: [tae] [tsv-area] Transport negotiation

Lloyd Wood <L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk> Thu, 27 November 2008 01:09 UTC

Return-Path: <tae-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tae-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-tae-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 206B63A6960; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:09:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: tae@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tae@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B503A3A69D7; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:01:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bkRHMHB7RD3p; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:01:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail115.messagelabs.com (mail115.messagelabs.com [195.245.231.179]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 21C753A67AF; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:01:25 -0800 (PST)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk
X-Msg-Ref: server-12.tower-115.messagelabs.com!1227747681!55392864!1
X-StarScan-Version: 5.5.12.14.2; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [131.227.102.140]
Received: (qmail 20891 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2008 01:01:21 -0000
Received: from ads40.surrey.ac.uk (HELO ads40.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.102.140) by server-12.tower-115.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 27 Nov 2008 01:01:21 -0000
Received: from ads31.surrey.ac.uk ([131.227.120.131]) by ads40.surrey.ac.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 27 Nov 2008 01:01:21 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.209] ([86.3.93.24]) by ads31.surrey.ac.uk over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 27 Nov 2008 01:01:20 +0000
Message-Id: <DF36ABE5-F5D9-4382-AD86-BE812F130EBA@surrey.ac.uk>
From: Lloyd Wood <L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>
To: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <492DE8AD.1090300@isi.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2)
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 01:01:20 +0000
References: <3BB334D8-B00C-48C1-ACBF-4D09576DEADF@mpi-sws.org> <492C7F97.3030000@isi.edu> <EDCC4CF2-DC3C-409F-8F99-3BE51BAE4111@surrey.ac.uk> <492DE8AD.1090300@isi.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Nov 2008 01:01:21.0100 (UTC) FILETIME=[A94D48C0:01C9502B]
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:09:28 -0800
Cc: tae@ietf.org, tsv-area@ietf.org, Lloyd Wood <L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: [tae] [tsv-area] Transport negotiation
X-BeenThere: tae@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Architecture Evolution <tae.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tae>, <mailto:tae-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/tae>
List-Post: <mailto:tae@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tae-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tae>, <mailto:tae-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes"
Sender: tae-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tae-bounces@ietf.org

We'd be specifying the "service" more accurately with mechanism/ 
transport. (actually,
/ is reserved for uris according to RFC2396 and using it would open a  
can of syntactic worms, so let's use mechanism-transport as dash is  
fine. I see Preethi skipped delimiters with her "httpsctp"; https- vs  
http- follows the usual security naming, at least.)

If the transport is unspecified, it would go to the default of http- 
tcp-ipv4: - so http://10.0.0.1/ would work as expected by being  
equivalent to http-tcp-ipv4://10.0.0.1/ , while http-tcp- 
ipv6://10.0.0.1/ generates an error.

And yes, http-tcp would be the usual expected mapping for this  
superset of the "http:" defined in RFC2616, that currently floats  
between v4 and v6 depending on local setup. Configuring away from that  
would be as unusual as turning off v4 entirely.

On 27 Nov 2008, at 00:24, Joe Touch wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>
> Lloyd Wood wrote:
> ...
>> On choosing transport, couldn't http:// just map to
>> http/<whatever-is-favoured>:// ?
>
> we say:
> 	service://location/directory...
>
> service is an application protocol
> location is either a DNS name or an IP address, where the latter makes
> the network protocol explicit (IPv4 or IPv6).
>
> We could exploit the DNS SRV format here:
>
> 	service://_transport.location/directory...
>
>> Explicitly asking for http/tcp:// or http/sctp:// would produce
>> different behaviour. I don't see a need to involve DNS here -
>> but I'd quite like to be able to specify http/tcp/ipv6:// or
>> http/sctp/ipv4:// to force behaviour in the browser, while
>> knowing that http:// just works.
>
> http:// doesn't "just work" - it specifically indicates "HTTP over  
> TCP"
> IMO. And http://10.0.0.1/ specifies "HTTP over TCP over IPv4".
>
> Joe
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkkt6K0ACgkQE5f5cImnZrttagCeO5x9o2c6OivbkXzC8HeqALQr
> otkAoOiKjbG5WBGwra/LCGF62zNfdA+6
> =VruI
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

DTN work: http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/saratoga/

<http://info.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/><L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>





_______________________________________________
tae mailing list
tae@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tae