Re: [Uri-review] I-D Action:draft-weiler-rsync-uri-00.txt

Samuel Weiler <weiler@tislabs.com> Tue, 07 July 2009 17:08 UTC

Return-Path: <weiler@tislabs.com>
X-Original-To: uri-review@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: uri-review@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A61E128C4EB for <uri-review@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 10:08:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 QCWM6f1fzxGE for <uri-review@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 10:08:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from M4.sparta.com (M4.sparta.com [157.185.61.2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B04A928C301 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 10:08:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Beta5.sparta.com (beta5.sparta.com [157.185.63.21]) by M4.sparta.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id n67H8IEQ020102; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 12:08:18 -0500
Received: from nemo.columbia.ads.sparta.com (nemo.columbia.sparta.com [157.185.80.75]) by Beta5.sparta.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n67H8Iox007951; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 12:08:18 -0500
Received: from localhost ([157.185.80.253]) by nemo.columbia.ads.sparta.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 7 Jul 2009 13:08:18 -0400
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 13:08:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: Samuel Weiler <weiler@tislabs.com>
X-X-Sender: weiler@little
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <p0624082fc67925a8c2d4@[10.20.30.158]>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0907071303260.28451@little>
References: <20090706211501.6BAB13A68AC@core3.amsl.com> <p0624082fc67925a8c2d4@[10.20.30.158]>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jul 2009 17:08:18.0247 (UTC) FILETIME=[85EBDD70:01C9FF25]
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 23:30:09 -0700
Cc: uri-review@ietf.org, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, dward@cisco.com
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] I-D Action:draft-weiler-rsync-uri-00.txt
X-BeenThere: uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proposed URI Schemes <uri-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:08:37 -0000

> The registration calls "rsync" both a protocol and an application. I 
> believe that only the latter is true, given that the protocol is not 
> specified anywhere stable other than in the code of the application. 
> This is a sore point for many people, myself included.

Fair enough.

> Please update the URI request to change "protocol" to "application" 
> in the two places it is used.  At that point, the URI reviewers can 
> decide whether or not they want to approve the registration for an 
> application-specific URI. I am generally against such registrations, 
> but in this case is makes sense.

Given the draft lockdown, presume that change will be made.

URI reviewers: feel free to take on the draft as it stands, knowing 
that the change Paul requested will be made.

-- Sam