Re: [Uri-review] Request for URI schemes assigned to OPC UA

Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org> Fri, 26 May 2017 04:23 UTC

Return-Path: <gk@ninebynine.org>
X-Original-To: uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFA4F126B71 for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 May 2017 21:23:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 ezyc2PhjFqrE for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 May 2017 21:23:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay13.mail.ox.ac.uk (relay13.mail.ox.ac.uk [129.67.1.166]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A062312946C for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 May 2017 21:23:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp4.mail.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.207]) by relay13.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <gk@ninebynine.org>) id 1dE6m9-000226-hV; Fri, 26 May 2017 05:22:58 +0100
Received: from gklyne38.plus.com ([81.174.129.24] helo=conina-wl.atuin.ninebynine.org) by smtp4.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <gk@ninebynine.org>) id 1dE6m9-0007kq-D1; Fri, 26 May 2017 05:22:57 +0100
Message-ID: <5927AD9F.3050705@ninebynine.org>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2017 05:22:55 +0100
From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Randy Armstrong <randy.armstrong@opcfoundation.org>, "uri-review@ietf.org" <uri-review@ietf.org>
CC: TCB <TCB@opcfoundation.org>
References: <SN2PR0801MB606937F9F7215C2E994F5BEFAF80@SN2PR0801MB606.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>, <5923FBBF.6000409@ninebynine.org> <SN2PR0801MB606CCA44CBB76C20B084165FAF90@SN2PR0801MB606.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <SN2PR0801MB606CCA44CBB76C20B084165FAF90@SN2PR0801MB606.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Oxford-Username: zool0635
X-Oxmail-Spam-Status: score=0.0 tests=none
X-Oxmail-Spam-Level: /
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/uri-review/Dc-5aV8SSx9IZMBM7Bb_oQ2YzjE>
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] Request for URI schemes assigned to OPC UA
X-BeenThere: uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proposed URI Schemes <uri-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/uri-review/>
List-Post: <mailto:uri-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 May 2017 04:23:03 -0000

On 23/05/2017 13:30, Randy Armstrong wrote:
> 1) We use the schemes for URLs that identify multiple network paths to a single resource which is identified with a URI that uses the 'urn' scheme. It is not clear to me that registration is required for this usage. Please advise.
>

The URN as identifier seems reasonable enough.  I would suggest provisional 
registration for the "network path" schemes, which seems more appropriate for these.

As far as I can tell from the registration template, your URI "network path" 
schemes would not be used in the open Web, and as such would not be used 
publicly in the Web as identifiers.

>
> 2) The specs is an IEC specification as well (see https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/21993 ). In addition, the text quoted is old. Anyone can download the specifications from the OPC Foundation website today.

It would help, then, to include a direct link to the publicly downloadable 
specification in the registration template.

#g
--

>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 2:07:11 AM
> To: Randy Armstrong; uri-review@ietf.org
> Cc: TCB
> Subject: Re: [Uri-review] Request for URI schemes assigned to OPC UA
>
> I have two objections here to permanent registration:
>
> 1. The specifications appear to be non-open "Note: Access to specifications and
> developer resources are available to OPC Foundation members only."
>
> 2. The use of multiple URI schemes to access the same resource goes against
> principles of web architecture [http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#uri-aliases].
>
> This topic has been discussed previously on this list: see thread at [1].
>
> [1]
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=uri-review&gbt=1&index=ze2I30iloSGZxlP2vAeCWcPOWus
>
> #g
> --
>
>
>
> On 22/05/2017 22:04, Randy Armstrong wrote:
>> Scheme name:
>>
>> opc.tcp       :  OPC UA Connection Protocol over TCP/IP
>> opc.amqp  :  OPC UA Connection Protocol over AMQP
>> opc.wss      :  OPC UA Connection Protocol over WebSockets
>>
>> We expect to add new schemes as time goes on.
>>
>> Status:  permanent
>>
>> Applications/protocols that use this scheme name:
>>
>> Applications which implement the OPC UA Connection Protocol defined by the OPC Unified Architecture specification:
>> https://opcfoundation.org/developer-tools/specifications-unified-architecture
>>
>> The opc.tcp scheme has been in use in the field for about 10 years (we were unaware of the registration process).
>> Note that the OPC Foundation has a trademark on the term "OPC" (see US Trademark #78732560)
>>
>> Contact:
>> Randy Armstrong
>> tcb@opcfoundation.org
>>
>> Change controller:
>> OPC Foundation
>> https://opcfoundation.org/
>>
>> References:
>> The protocols and schemes are defined in Part 6: Mappings:
>> http://www.opcfoundation.org/UA/Part6/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Uri-review mailing list
>> Uri-review@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review
>>
>