Re: [Uri-review] [IANA #1278861] Request for Assignment (uri-schemes)

[Michael Jones <[e-mail]>]

Provisional registration would be fine at this time.  Please proceed to do so.

As for there being a standard, I'll note that the use of the "openid:" URI scheme was established by the OpenID Connect Core 1.0 standard in 2014.  Yes, I do understand that the spec does not fully specify the URI syntax, which is why the working group is OK with provisional registration at this time.

                                Thanks,
                                -- Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: David Dong via RT <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 2:59 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: [IANA #1278861] Request for Assignment (uri-schemes)

Hi Michael (ccing: [e-mail]),

Please see below for review from Graham Klyne.

Please let us if you would like to proceed with a provisional registration instead as well.

Best regards,

David Dong
IANA Services Sr. Specialist

--

Referring to: https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0-31.html#URISchemeRegistry

I would say that this is OK for provisional registration, but not yet for permanent registration.

Problems I'm seeing are:

1.  the reference provided in the registration template does not appear to provide a URI specification.  Among other things, I'm expecting there to be a syntax specification that can be checked for conformity with RFC3986 generic URI syntax.  Also there are other considerations mentioned at https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7595#section-3

2. A permanent URI registration is usually expected to broadly meet the requirements for an IETF standard - the obvious way to do this is by publication as a standards track RFC.  Other possible routes (for permanent URI scheme registrations) are as an IETF track informational or experimental RFC, or alternatively as publication as a standard (or equivalent) by an organisation recognised in the IETF as a creator of open standards.

I  see at  https://www.iana.org/assignments/iesg-recognized-organizations/iesg-recognized-organizations.xhtml that OpenId Foundation are recognised in the IETF as a producer of standards.  So for a permanent registration I would be looking for an indication that the specification has passed through whatever consensus process that organisation uses for approving its publications as standards.

#g

On Mon Aug 14 16:33:23 2023, [e-mail] wrote:
>
> Contact Name:
> Michael B. Jones
>
> Contact Email:
> [e-mail]
>
> Type of Assignment:
> URI Scheme
>
> Registry:
> https://www.i/
> ana.org%2Fassignments%2Furi-schemes%2Furi-schemes.xhtml&data=05%7C01%7
> C%7Cd178d07404e24b3cbd2008db9d11a826%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaa
> a%7C1%7C0%7C638276471382850489%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjA
> wMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sd
> ata=wbEf%2FmbUyOb2GBB%2F%2BXzKjpzrHaPfQS1bW0cBgJohmTw%3D&reserved=0
>
> Description:
> The OpenID Connect protocol has used the "openid" scheme for a decade
> but it has never been registered.  Several requests have come in over
> the years to register it.  I requested registration on the uri-
> [e-mail] list over two weeks ago and there has been no
> response.
>
> Additional Info:
> Please register the "openid" scheme as requested at
> https://openi/
> d.net%2Fspecs%2Fopenid-connect-core-1_0-&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cd178d07404e
> 24b3cbd2008db9d11a826%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638
> 276471382850489%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2
> luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=7hY8eTvzeRl
> SleQh%2BdsluxtzXNpxcA008bq7AZGvfjQ%3D&reserved=0
> 31.html#URISchemeRegistry.