IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Uri-review] [art] [dispatch] Internet-Draft: Using URIs With Multiple Transport Stacks

Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com> Sun, 27 August 2017 16:19 UTC

Return-Path: <nrm@arcanedomain.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 D5631132328; Sun, 27 Aug 2017 09:19:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.121
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.121 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arcanedomain.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 7qxFBHp-ancB; Sun, 27 Aug 2017 09:19:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a9.g.dreamhost.com (homie.mail.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.208]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A0E6132937; Sun, 27 Aug 2017 09:19:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a9.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a9.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F39D5BE066; Sun, 27 Aug 2017 09:19:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=arcanedomain.com; h= subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= arcanedomain.com; bh=pBQ8KrWc2ojEU5PxHVVS3crnsf8=; b=IFCtJvRN5S3 ifFM6+dhnuDm1BYwhGQFbx1YhQtaB2F9F4OkgotFcH6Oc0Bqb7G0uwFTM6WEhcFM 1gGxMdveEfT1a+PAa6CIM361QTwZoXAlBlQ7cRJSXOLfDoXCLz1nNCujCnsHUnsC ZyhMX+TWV6MeT2SyNUleIMKpwtt7rtKk=
Received: from [192.168.1.101] (216-15-112-214.s4564.c3-0.arl-ubr1.sbo-arl.ma.cable.rcncustomer.com [216.15.112.214]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: webmaster@arcanedomain.com) by homiemail-a9.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 046995BE064; Sun, 27 Aug 2017 09:19:53 -0700 (PDT)
To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Cc: "art@ietf.org" <art@ietf.org>, "uri-review@ietf.org" <uri-review@ietf.org>, "dispatch@ietf.org" <dispatch@ietf.org>
References: <MWHPR21MB0125E2464E9B3A25E0FB8967A3D50@MWHPR21MB0125.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <f5b1spsl1mr.fsf@troutbeck.inf.ed.ac.uk> <2BA6A41C-7933-4405-997D-BE2D0DA69CF5@mnot.net> <ea7d1dfd-08de-fed6-50c1-b5ccece8037c@arcanedomain.com> <e8d97421-4c49-e40b-4e61-cdb2bb6dacad@dbooth.org>
From: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
Message-ID: <700104d3-4be3-56d9-31c4-8252315a2c2e@arcanedomain.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2017 12:19:52 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <e8d97421-4c49-e40b-4e61-cdb2bb6dacad@dbooth.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/uri-review/sjctX7FfngJsWJ-Fp3vh1S3J1p8>
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] [art] [dispatch] Internet-Draft: Using URIs With Multiple Transport Stacks
X-BeenThere: uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Sun, 27 Aug 2017 16:19:57 -0000

On 8/3/2017 6:21 PM, David Booth wrote:
> It sounds to me like the history that you just explained in email would be 
> a perfect addition to those draft documents, as an editor note, so that 
> people who find them can more easily understand their context.

Maybe. What I wrote in the email is just my recollection of what happened 
more than ten years ago; I'm not 100% sure other TAG members would have 
seen it the same way at the time or would recall it the same way now.

Perhaps it would be better to record a briefer note that there was some 
history of difficulty in reaching consensus on the connection between URI 
schemes and protocols, perhaps with a link to my email as background reading?

In any case, I have no strong feelings about what should be done now.

Noah

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email