Re: [urn] // in gnunet://, and other P2P URN's

Ivan Shmakov <> Mon, 22 October 2012 05:29 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDAAA21F87DF for <>; Sun, 21 Oct 2012 22:29:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.554
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.554 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.445, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_52=0.6]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jkA-b0KMRFIz for <>; Sun, 21 Oct 2012 22:29:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF37221F8A12 for <>; Sun, 21 Oct 2012 22:29:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from list by with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <>) id 1TQAa9-0006JZ-5i for; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 07:29:45 +0200
Received: from ([]) by with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <>; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 07:29:45 +0200
Received: from oneingray by with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <>; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 07:29:45 +0200
From: Ivan Shmakov <>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 12:29:23 +0700
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:858Dy8/5CIFqreN/fWWf6saqBe8=
Subject: Re: [urn] // in gnunet://, and other P2P URN's
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Revisions to URN RFCs <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 05:29:43 -0000

>>>>> Alfred Hönes <> writes:

 > since you (at least in your message) don't speak about URNs in the
 > sense we are talking about here (cf. the charter of the URNbis
 > working group and our drafts to revise RFCs 2141 and 3406), I think
 > the discussion you seek is out of topic for the urn list.

 > Please redirect your concerns and questions to some URI related
 > list(s) according to their specific dedication.

 > The particular, the uri-review (AT) list has focus on URI
 > scheme registrations.  More general URI-centric lists are hosted by
 > the W3C.

	ACK, thanks for the pointers!

	There were two sources of confusion for me.  First, there's the
	urn:uuid: namespace (as per RFC 4122), which allows for
	content-based (MD5, SHA-1) identifiers, similar to those
	employed in P2P filesharing networks (including BitTorrent,
	Freenet, and GNUnet.)

	Second, there're (non-standard, though, as it seems, widely
	used) urn:btih: (and, similarly, urn:sha1:, etc.) URI's that, I
	believe, were intended for registration as URN namespaces.

	However, I was since pointed to the proposed ni: URI scheme [1],
	which appears to be better suited to the task of P2P content

	(To clarify: while the present gnunet: URI's are indeed
	application-specific, the primary payload of such URI's are
	base32hex-encoded SHA-512 digests over arbitrary content.  While
	the ni: scheme as proposed doesn't allow for such, it provides
	the relevant extension mechanism, which may allow for gnunet:
	URI's, as well as urn:btih: and freenet:, to be superseded with
	ni: ones in the future.)



FSF associate member #7257