IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [urn] Comments on PWID -05

worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) Fri, 01 March 2019 02:31 UTC

Return-Path: <worley@alum.mit.edu>
X-Original-To: urn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: urn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39D111289FA for <urn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 18:31:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.933
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.933 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=comcastmailservice.net
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 hIyD9ubOVWWD for <urn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 18:31:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from resqmta-ch2-02v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-02v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:34]) (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 83427126C15 for <urn@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 18:31:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from resomta-ch2-05v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.101]) by resqmta-ch2-02v.sys.comcast.net with ESMTP id zUXhgmVgAUNMVzXxPg5vXR; Fri, 01 Mar 2019 02:31:27 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcastmailservice.net; s=20180828_2048; t=1551407487; bh=WDfJatRce7rECa+YLingi1VOUTlF6GYEUPpF97rTrEk=; h=Received:Received:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date: Message-ID; b=PuqVemWC21WfKxfqGsIKvUX8P4Xbh6MdnhRHpxFVhp6dqjM8TIaBj9ZAURvEm16dQ lX+6yu51LBncmnj9vFN13WX9UO9nFp8AGnAGhLeLTImaWLKO+UflA4dzwF2LkjgTdx m2t6x2bOvHqBmL4irPAkrmUYg1gPe/9iULHeQ/bGqru45HyfP9PSkm+7e6aT3AMYuj Sg3eUsMrG4HaVEaAd6k9ssaLbUu6RBh5lXqVfrX96uHlYmSKkiV50l66dkUWpq0Cvx 7IeCCDRkls7xamXCe2OGoONSKGVhekdfuYkJBX1enIAEpotvYQp4IsVwM8t60k8zrW n7UnLjbLFuhQQ==
Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com ([IPv6:2601:192:4603:9471:222:fbff:fe91:d396]) by resomta-ch2-05v.sys.comcast.net with ESMTPA id zXxLg0sqOl0TEzXxMgt7Z7; Fri, 01 Mar 2019 02:31:25 +0000
X-Xfinity-VMeta: sc=0;st=legit
Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com (hobgoblin.ariadne.com [127.0.0.1]) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id x212VMwV019950; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 21:31:22 -0500
Received: (from worley@localhost) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id x212VKM1019936; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 21:31:20 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: hobgoblin.ariadne.com: worley set sender to worley@alum.mit.edu using -f
From: worley@ariadne.com
To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Cc: elzi@kb.dk, urn@ietf.org, L.Svensson@dnb.de
In-Reply-To: <521105f9-9fdc-d88f-e5fb-3efaae7153cd@it.aoyama.ac.jp> (duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp)
Sender: worley@ariadne.com
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 21:31:19 -0500
Message-ID: <87zhqffhqg.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/urn/UnThQp-fnAdLjY2pS79y_N_awgo>
Subject: Re: [urn] Comments on PWID -05
X-BeenThere: urn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Revisions to URN RFCs <urn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/urn>, <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/urn/>
List-Post: <mailto:urn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn>, <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2019 02:31:30 -0000

Martin J. Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> writes:
>> [...]  E.g., one could require that any
>> archive-id that is not intended to be interpreted as a DNS name to start
>> with one of "-", ".", "_", "~".
>
> I haven't looked into the details, but in general, I think this is a bad 
> idea. It is much better to have an explicit distinction than to rely on 
> some syntax restrictions. Such syntax restrictions may or may not 
> actually hold in practice. It's very easy to create a DNS name starting 
> with '-' or '_', for example, even though officially, that's not allowed.

I may agree with you ... But what do you mean by "an explicit
distinction"?  E.g., I would tend to consider "archive-ids starting with
'~' are registered archive names, and archive-ids that do not are
considered DNS names" to be an "explicit" distinction, but you mean
something else.

Or maybe the right question is, What do you propose as an alternative?

Dale

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email