Re: [Uri-review] ssh URI

Kristof Zelechovski <giecrilj@stegny.2a.pl> Tue, 13 October 2009 08:26 UTC

Return-Path: <giecrilj@stegny.2a.pl>
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 31E3F28C111 for <uri-review@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 01:26:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.993
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.993 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.093, BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95]
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 VDS3fUyoUt2c for <uri-review@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 01:26:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shark.2a.pl (shark.2a.pl [195.117.102.3]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 672403A6926 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 01:26:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from av.2a.pl (av.2a.pl [195.117.102.9]) by shark.2a.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FD482A6A86; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 10:26:55 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at 2a.pl
Received: from shark.2a.pl ([195.117.102.3]) by av.2a.pl (av.2a.pl [195.117.102.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ha06MPY1KjyQ; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 10:26:49 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from POCZTOWIEC (unknown [10.8.1.26]) by shark.2a.pl (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 12C352A6A33; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 10:26:49 +0200 (CEST)
From: Kristof Zelechovski <giecrilj@stegny.2a.pl>
To: 'David Booth' <david@dbooth.org>
References: <20091009160149.GB16908@braingia.org> <1255366894.5481.8445.camel@dbooth-laptop> <5EAB4D387A4A4B7C854FBD1869729771@POCZTOWIEC> <1255395156.5481.10083.camel@dbooth-laptop>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 10:26:44 +0200
Message-ID: <9C0948C93F994183B7DFEC12A335F250@POCZTOWIEC>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-reply-to: <1255395156.5481.10083.camel@dbooth-laptop>
Thread-Index: AcpLoG0OnVuP24R0QiKnhyixl4xhegAPP5uw
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
Cc: uri-review@ietf.org, uri@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] ssh URI
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, 13 Oct 2009 08:26:56 -0000

The browsers, at least the ones I have used, do not know the semantics about
URI schemes, except for the ones they handle internally.  They do not need
that to launch an external client or to invoke a plug-in which, at
installation, informed the browser that it can handle such schemes.  As has
already demonstrated, there is no such mechanism for URI prefixes, and
indeed there should not be because the surprise factor is too big.
There is no value in educating browser users how to connect to random SSH
servers because every such connection is backed by a preceding contract
between the provider who runs a server and the customer who is allowed to
connect.  So there is nothing to discover here.
Best regards,
Chris