IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Uri-review] Request for review

"Daniel R. Tobias" <dan@tobias.name> Sun, 31 May 2020 18:24 UTC

Return-Path: <dan@tobias.name>
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 A433C3A0B08 for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 May 2020 11:24:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, 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 Vfc1Gf0dV0tt for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 May 2020 11:24:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dragonfly.birch.relay.mailchannels.net (dragonfly.birch.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.209.51]) (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 79C953A0A50 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 May 2020 11:24:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|mail@dan.tobias.name
Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A52320D8D for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 May 2020 18:24:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a58.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-6-17.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.6.17]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 28AF7320C32 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 May 2020 18:24:46 +0000 (UTC)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|mail@dan.tobias.name
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a58.g.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.18.8); Sun, 31 May 2020 18:24:46 +0000
X-MC-Relay: Neutral
X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|mail@dan.tobias.name
X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost
X-Grain-Bitter: 1e50420847df45e1_1590949486374_1767595664
X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1590949486374:470774744
X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1590949486373
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a58.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a58.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D873A80458 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 May 2020 11:24:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (c-73-245-214-115.hsd1.fl.comcast.net [73.245.214.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mail@dan.tobias.name) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a58.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 08E8C8047B for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 May 2020 11:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a58
From: "Daniel R. Tobias" <dan@tobias.name>
To: uri-review@ietf.org
Date: Sun, 31 May 2020 14:24:43 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <5ED3F66B.7204.10663FF@dan.tobias.name>
Priority: normal
In-reply-to: <DM6PR18MB270066320792DAC3091C6DA4F98C0@DM6PR18MB2700.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
References: <491516506.246380.1589851279474@email.ionos.com>, <1435838702.391137.1590841215132@email.ionos.com>, <DM6PR18MB270066320792DAC3091C6DA4F98C0@DM6PR18MB2700.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.73.639)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-description: Mail message body
X-VR-OUT-STATUS: OK
X-VR-OUT-SCORE: 0
X-VR-OUT-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrudeffedguddvudcutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfftffgtefojffquffvnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhephffvffgguffkjghfofgtgfesthfuredtffdtvdenucfhrhhomhepfdffrghnihgvlhcutfdrucfvohgsihgrshdfuceouggrnhesthhosghirghsrdhnrghmvgeqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepteekhffhueevtefftdeugeehtdevjeffhfegheeutdeiveevfeduleelvdehgfejnecuffhomhgrihhnpegurghnrdhinhhfohenucfkphepjeefrddvgeehrddvudegrdduudehnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmohguvgepshhmthhppdhhvghloheplgdutddrtddrtddrvdgnpdhinhgvthepjeefrddvgeehrddvudegrdduudehpdhrvghtuhhrnhdqphgrthhhpedfffgrnhhivghlucftrdcuvfhosghirghsfdcuoegurghnsehtohgsihgrshdrnhgrmhgvqedpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegurghnsehtohgsihgrshdrnhgrmhgvpdhnrhgtphhtthhopehurhhiqdhrvghvihgvfiesihgvthhfrdhorhhg
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/uri-review/HMKmFtpo8YshMt403x9rLWalak8>
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] Request for review
X-BeenThere: uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 31 May 2020 18:24:49 -0000

On 30 May 2020 at 14:01, Michael Wojcik wrote:

> To be honest, I don't understand why you're being so difficult about
> this. What's your motive for trying to find grounds in 3986 for
> repurposing the fragment identifier?

I'm struggling to figure out what the guy's true agenda is, too; why 
he's so wedded to the nonstandard syntax he is proposing. Maybe he's 
got an implementation out there somewhere with the quirky syntax 
embedded that he doesn't want to have to change?

-- 
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email