Re: [urn] Request for oneM2M URN Namespace registration

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Tue, 06 December 2022 02:29 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
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 7BF92C152580 for <urn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Dec 2022 18:29:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.099 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=j6P+bMFJ; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Zb9Yr9aj
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zWGniC5l5k4q for <urn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Dec 2022 18:29:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DFA1C14CF0D for <urn@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Dec 2022 18:29:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD9853200926; Mon, 5 Dec 2022 21:29:18 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 05 Dec 2022 21:29:19 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1670293758; x= 1670380158; bh=Ks5CmKMqysZT+AdKeMtCQM98SHBQTSkBZqacdeljfmU=; b=j 6P+bMFJ2QXbL4qgZXqHMfD7KD/qNULmeMezox3LMMikshIGV1dETUFv7W3Q0UeAf 2yhP2L1hJxMHGy43pirFy2qju1zfgGSJNGBg5oGBwWi03l6uxhTyw3ou69OcOQLj JuY2Xa6Kx2BozJYpX1YEZOETBcjbpJoGG0KNRA8u/mIRS7qsdNfuSD5XSVfKIeS+ cxicUGvrluJ7sjKllSXjDS33TG/fG7MInEnVZzXKyngE8EGTFFc5DaBXo+9AO/NM AOKmX3vItcXvxV4TRjrVHTRhozvl97Xb2Ta7OvaB6OmEAj5fT5ujjTR8a0FqDaiK v/kwxlWzvstfq4WtBWUkg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1670293758; x= 1670380158; bh=Ks5CmKMqysZT+AdKeMtCQM98SHBQTSkBZqacdeljfmU=; b=Z b9Yr9ajPOhGtwNBK2XpTzlAVuEsyw9u2CkODHidVHmxJ7ZEwk9R5AFIuObt1UkTJ 8l1tKKj6FGEfIYen+eSlpz078hV7CVaeJbsjfDK9wyqRjVwyMvLVMCZdE0meNAFr J82En3Wvi1ao7Q97p5w7ifHSdnOusgWYWLqIM/eIlGC/q8cLIZO27cSDG63AAngI Q+gBSqrR4bjUIsXIJvS+UgRBV6cFDQw0OdfxJveXhven6k9iCIRE4I4L2qz4AGXI bi62AO4+x4NTu/bBpGhq059m4Fn7RDSknF8wuSKYKWNSo4n0v8qyotaDGB8Wpwz+ jPDTf1q4ZIkaePuSCFaDg==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:_aiOY0Fig9xoi-m4YkjBrvD_hTHLnDJS82Bpo8iEcCyhPdd8s6pEyQ> <xme:_aiOY9VXGSgFY-Bt6QIPCRbTxlgXKu6bi825d6WbM_AnBO6_gtrNltr-wssQo9LhU DyMnqgGtvlrjy9kFw>
X-ME-Received: <xmr:_aiOY-IbcH1vuOujEhZaFwI6oCerNbE6dkG4DKNpjUNMKeGDooLN_-sZUpFnvJ-r>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrudehgdegjecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefkffggfgfuvfevfhfhjggtgfesthejredttdefjeenucfhrhhomheprfgvthgv rhcuufgrihhnthdqtehnughrvgcuoehsthhpvghtvghrsehsthhpvghtvghrrdhimheqne cuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepteejlefguefhjeegvefffeelffejveeifeetjedvhfehlefg vddvieefhffgtddvnecuffhomhgrihhnpehirghnrgdrohhrghdpohhnvghmvdhmrdhorh hgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepshht phgvthgvrhesshhtphgvthgvrhdrihhm
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:_qiOY2FXBBcbu1m60U57lTlJJX72gbnmXEe2YiBPFC84Jk2ATrcZCw> <xmx:_qiOY6UeCptGTQbtdY_GjYkjSVUrnfIs-uO_HZaSE3m054QH5B1eZA> <xmx:_qiOY5Pm2fGMGDe4X0VikBYgkq0DlrAm3mhRMlzl_UfPsf08Ewtf_A> <xmx:_qiOY3h7-uoJRTrwRRLy1pBMbS1oG4VpE_lvzMAWJ3xnGJLJpeO_jg>
Feedback-ID: i24394279:Fastmail
Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 5 Dec 2022 21:29:17 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <f15df20e-cc6a-58dc-a4ab-f3a2bed3300c@stpeter.im>
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2022 19:29:16 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.5.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: "Dale R. Worley" <worley@ariadne.com>, Miguel Angel Reina Ortega <MiguelAngel.ReinaOrtega=40etsi.org@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: urn@ietf.org
References: <87tu2rq4ag.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com>
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
In-Reply-To: <87tu2rq4ag.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/urn/XWHWkt7lnfj6zMNtfc9kLgcfnhE>
Subject: Re: [urn] Request for oneM2M URN Namespace registration
X-BeenThere: urn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Tue, 06 Dec 2022 02:29:26 -0000

On 11/21/22 4:24 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote:
>> The namespace is now registered:
>>
>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/urn-namespaces/urn-namespaces.xhtml
> 
> Thanks, Peter, for pushing this through.  I was going to say that I
> apologize for not engaging with this proposal, but I see that very early
> I recommended fast-tracking it with no objections.
> 
> However, there is one place I think the wording could be improved.  I
> doubt the registration template can be changed easily at this date, 

Actually it's fairly straightforward to do so.

> but
> the web page
> https://wiki.onem2m.org/index.php?title=OneM2M_URN_Namespace could be
> updated to clarify the intention.  Specifically, it says
> 
>      As general rule, the NSS-restoftree is limited to printable ASCII
>      character set, unless otherwise specified by the sub-node namespace.
> 
> The NSS is part of the URN, and a URN is required to be a sequence of
> printable ASCII characters.  So this sentence, read literally, imposes
> no new constraint.
> 
> Of course, what you mean is that NSS-restoftree is (usually) limited to
> not *represent* non-ASCII characters, that is, it does not contain what
> are commonly called %-escapes, '"%" <hex> <hex>'.
> 
> The question is what is a more accurate, but still clear, statement of
> the intention.  Looking at RFC 8141, I see that it refers to RFC 2141 to
> specify the syntax, and in RFC 2141 section 2.2 are the rules:
> 
>     <NSS>         ::= 1*<URN chars>
> 
>     <URN chars>   ::= <trans> | "%" <hex> <hex>
> 
>     <trans>       ::= <upper> | <lower> | <number> | <other> | <reserved>
> 
>     <hex>         ::= <number> | "A" | "B" | "C" | "D" | "E" | "F" |
>                       "a" | "b" | "c" | "d" | "e" | "f"
> 
>     [definitions of upper, lower, number, other, and reserved omitted]
> 
> So you could accurately say that NSS-restoftree is (usually) limited to
> <trans> characters.  But nobody would understand that without a direct
> reference to RFC 2141!
> 
> Perhaps a better wording is
> 
>      As a general rule, unless otherwise specified by the sub-node
>      namespace, the NSS-restoftree does not contain %-escapes, and thus
>      represents only the printable ASCII character set.
>      
> Here, I've moved the qualifying "unless ..." earlier in the sentence to
> connect it more with "As a general rule".

We could definitely fix this in the template. Miguel, do you agree with 
Dale's proposed clarification?

Peter