Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:"
Jim Zubov <ietf-list@commercebyte.com> Sat, 18 December 2021 21:10 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-list@commercebyte.com>
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 AF0843A1195 for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Dec 2021 13:10:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=commercebyte.com
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 nS9MCC8okgRn for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Dec 2021 13:10:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ocean1.commercebyte.com (ocean1.commercebyte.com [104.131.120.15]) (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 1C6803A1194 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Sat, 18 Dec 2021 13:10:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=commercebyte.com; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:From:Date; bh=1tIxuMq0e7vceXBUrwQPV2JLgNIqmR0yP8Xhsc/GnXY=; b=cF4CuwhkVs18xmv4AKZLSVX+R7e+c4Rn+YfEzv1K8paqTboGsr5TeCYakV4fiZP0skmAjWfWJvgIk9YfR5U4omtTfshm5REcB+tHXJG7mf2lBQYZ5t2vXIr1yydxXcI5vDKkYM2E2HEoe3O2N+PcACtb5eQqfT8tKWchKuZchKw=;
Received: from 50-79-151-250-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([50.79.151.250]:29378 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ocean1.commercebyte.com with esmtpsa (UNKNOWN:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <ietf-list@commercebyte.com>) id 1mygyX-0003mO-Qz; Sat, 18 Dec 2021 16:10:42 -0500
Received: from [206.81.2.95]:7120 (helo=[127.0.0.1]) by [172.16.0.104]:48522 (localhost) with VESmail ESMTP Proxy 1.58 (encrypt=FALSE mode=FALLBACK); Sat, 18 Dec 2021 16:10:41 -0500
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2021 16:10:37 -0500
From: Jim Zubov <ietf-list@commercebyte.com>
To: uri-review@ietf.org, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <6280a74d-04aa-8ca8-5df9-3fd8e73afa92@gmx.de>
References: <e2dbbdce-f91d-a555-20c5-53a971be8d20@vesvault.com> <CAHBU6ivqJ8GL=gM35K33h0YRzrO0Bs4cd+To6YPezL78+aNNTQ@mail.gmail.com> <17b8d4be-9ba1-e3b5-b84a-6185185dc8ba@vesvault.com> <6280a74d-04aa-8ca8-5df9-3fd8e73afa92@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <4A853B10-1BD5-4334-9588-0759BB1D3327@commercebyte.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----MCLFFM10I4YHUO9NQLHKF4PUAESX3W"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ocean1.commercebyte.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - commercebyte.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: ocean1.commercebyte.com: authenticated_id: jz@nixob.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/uri-review/k7yG9uLbNdC-GMoT8dNkWgXoQpE>
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:"
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: Sat, 18 Dec 2021 21:10:48 -0000
On December 18, 2021 3:53:27 PM EST, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: Am 18.12.2021 um 20:15 schrieb Jim Zubov: Thanks for the comments - On 12/18/2021 1:15 PM, Tim Bray wrote: - Should you also register content-types for these things? If fact there's already one registered - application/vnd.ves.encrypted This is not a type VES URI is pointing to, but rather encrypted content stored by external means, the item encryption key for this content is identified by a VaultItem VES URI. There are no specific content types for objects identified by VES URIs, because those are handled by libVES or an equivalent tool, and are communicated in an e2ee form with the low level VES REST API as JSON objects. - Assuming you do, one wonders why you couldn't use regular old https URLs, if these things are located on a DNS-addressable server. The API server is DNS addressable, it's api.ves.host, however I see a few reasons to not use http uri - - There are forms of VES URI that use an implicit app domain, which comes from the current context of libVES, or other VES API tool. An http uri wouldn't have the means to use the current context; - I purposely specified some permitted violations of URI syntax that VES URI should tolerate, because it simplifies interactions between the client software and libVES, without causing any ambiguity; ... "I purposely specified some permitted violations of URI syntax" - seriously? That makes it a non-starter for URI registration, IMHO. Best regards, Julian I specified the violations, specifically stripped url encoding, that the software SHOULD understand, and libVES is fact DOES understand. The uri parts is still recommended to be properly url encoded to comply with the standards. Uri-review mailing list Uri-review@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
- [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Jim Zubov
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Tim Bray
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Jim Zubov
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Julian Reschke
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Jim Zubov
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Julian Reschke
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Michael Wojcik
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Jim Zubov
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Jim Zubov
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Jim Zubov
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Wade Benford
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Jim Zubov
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Wade Benford
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Jim Zubov
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Wade Benford
- Re: [Uri-review] URI Scheme "ves:" Jim Zubov