Re: [Uri-review] XMPP jabber: URI scheme not registered?

"Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Thu, 29 November 2012 04:14 UTC

Return-Path: <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
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 5413521E80B5 for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 20:14:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.069
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.069 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.121, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, J_CHICKENPOX_66=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XUkGaNS-NPXm for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 20:14:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp [133.2.253.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88DCD21E80A6 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 20:14:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.253.231]) by scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id qAT4EkTR018590 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 13:14:47 +0900
Received: from (unknown [133.2.206.133]) by scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp with smtp id 4b73_9d54_4f37f76a_39db_11e2_8bf1_001d096c5782; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 13:14:45 +0900
Received: from [IPv6:::1] ([133.2.210.1]:43639) by itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp with [XMail 1.22 ESMTP Server] id <S1619BB7> for <uri-review@ietf.org> from <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 13:14:47 +0900
Message-ID: <50B6E130.4030003@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 13:14:40 +0900
From: =?UTF-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiBKLiBEw7xyc3Qi?= <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Organization: Aoyama Gakuin University
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100722 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
References: <A723FC6ECC552A4D8C8249D9E07425A70F75EE78@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com> <50B4F2F0.3050406@stpeter.im> <50B652A7.2030502@ninebynine.org> <50B65E7D.9050005@stpeter.im> <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D1E371700C3@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com> <50B68BBA.1000302@stpeter.im> <50B69BF5.2040808@stpeter.im>
In-Reply-To: <50B69BF5.2040808@stpeter.im>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: "uri-review@ietf.org" <uri-review@ietf.org>, Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>, "xmpp@ietf.org" <xmpp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] XMPP jabber: URI scheme not registered?
X-BeenThere: uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 04:14:59 -0000

Hello Peter,

On 2012/11/29 8:19, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> So here is the registration...
>
> ###
>
>     URI scheme name.
>        jabber
>
>     Status.
>        permanent
>
>     URI scheme syntax.
>        The only allowable strings are:
>        - jabber:client
..
>     URI scheme semantics.
>        Strings of the form 'jabber:*' and 'jabber:*:*' were
>        used as XML namespace names during development of the
>        technology that became the Extensible Messaging and
>        Presence Protocol (XMPP).  The scheme was never used
>        for any other purpose.  The only namespace names
>        minted with this scheme are listed above.  No other
>        strings were minted, and no other strings shall be
>        minted.  Note that defining new URI schemes for XML
>        namespaces is now discouraged.  The 'jabber' scheme
>        was defined before standard best practices emerged.
>
>     Encoding considerations.
>        Encoded as UTF-8 within XMPP protocol streams.

This is irrelevant. See http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4395#section-2.6.

I would write this as following:

     Encoding considerations.
       None. All characters are within the characters allowed in URIs.

You may also be able to add the note that Björn suggested here.

Regards,   Martin.

>     Applications/protocols that use this URI scheme name.
>        Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP).
>
>     Interoperability considerations.
>        The 'jabber' scheme must not be used to identify or
>        enable interaction with XMPP addresses; the 'xmpp'
>        scheme defined in RFC 5122 is to be used in such
>        cases.
>
>     Security considerations.
>        See Section 13 of RFC 6120.
>
>     Contact.
>        Peter Saint-Andre<stpeter@jabber.org>;
>
>     Author/Change controller.
>        XMPP WG<xmpp@ietf.org>;
>
>     References.
>        RFC 6120
>
> ###
>
> Feedback is welcome.
>
> Peter
>
> - --
> Peter Saint-Andre
> https://stpeter.im/
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlC2m/UACgkQNL8k5A2w/vyA2ACgkKPJN21QgVYrmN8Sk6ZShLpz
> 6BgAnAkyDYhv2/sbi4fcn3R2h/FmbZvj
> =abXm
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Uri-review mailing list
> Uri-review@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review
>