Re: [urn] Registration request for urn:thread:

"Lars G. Svensson" <lars.svensson@web.de> Mon, 29 January 2024 10:03 UTC

Return-Path: <lars.svensson@web.de>
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 870A0C14F6AD for <urn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 02:03:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.803
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.803 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=web.de
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 aOgELJopucf1 for <urn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 02:03:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.web.de (mout.web.de [212.227.15.4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 35AECC14F6AE for <urn@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 02:03:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1706522570; x=1707127370; i=lars.svensson@web.de; bh=haBaz7WdVz5cbdDqFbgvyDOkkp230XioDfOhKPU1vbI=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject: Date; b=mPNwjUh1KB7fdvKT/o30oa4TROgvUwqbvEWSgG0Y1NYalGLdT3xPBlnn6WV+nXta xixvTG6dTTIyhRKtrI+UI4gtdBXuL2RVye/zxDhxIp4eJchexv1b7qbdiEGcKhEj+ YHzi5PkobnucOY2KJwX3K5N68/4N3QhSjNaQrcahKjlOnLf6QyWOUBoO6zJ8w54SJ fOf88EFKsTKeZgCAfC0DX/2SpuHl7IbhaoaD6/3KZoX1c87A2UsrDvIj/QzCAwO6H rmNeBn09CSsvxx1dPR1ZK3g256U7ArYOi0IE6zJh2IvLZQupPLAg1CDqbh5ySacZY qDAMzxoFvDsoKxc44g==
X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6
Received: from FNBW1006512 ([193.175.97.254]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb006 [213.165.67.108]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1Mr7ek-1qgQU01S9W-00oD3L; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:02:50 +0100
From: "Lars G. Svensson" <lars.svensson@web.de>
To: 'Esko Dijk' <esko.dijk@iotconsultancy.nl>
Cc: urn@ietf.org, 'Peter Saint-Andre' <stpeter@stpeter.im>, "'Dale R. Worley'" <worley@ariadne.com>
References: <877cjxjlxm.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> <90f740f7-d1b0-45ac-a035-6bd913ad84ee@stpeter.im> <DU0P190MB1978D9E87EAFED79FB331BE7FD7E2@DU0P190MB1978.EURP190.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <DU0P190MB1978D9E87EAFED79FB331BE7FD7E2@DU0P190MB1978.EURP190.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:02:49 +0100
Message-ID: <004801da529a$51504ff0$f3f0efd0$@web.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Content-Language: de
Thread-Index: AQKB5Y8b63IilmsRJBiZe5Oh24XH0AGhMozqAZDCVa2vh9ft8A==
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:DxTS3aYb6BFz3R9Dv1A/H3XNSwXUXis8O/Kt37dTEA5S0fY6io7 4j1afuj9z07NCJIVEhYuBSSYnWNRQPKNZv/kbRk21dxsGpXCpnpimwLbWfb1QC/FGxhWrZl JnSbytRMCATdEFtrzJCHm6QXTch7HFb3k30wItteiIeOFd5MVwb1JThSQ731VmGWo05x0X8 A0xI8m3ykfmMR1y7unBQg==
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:ZCn3ePk7P7c=;QuLJrZxyoi5c9/syLqdI6cvA50i hZEGZt/FkCDrdIOSFDNKhNnL/VlPHxUT4FKcGx+niuOuC7d4QDqYvwIZUYiAbrevclYx++I8C F4E2jonhKHSjVs0QbaPCiHnKz7VakvWirq/do2WXYgS4G1NuZ0XmQh9wnKB/StfHGo17Rf7dR QE/0zews41OFk7/vIAxOBgHvad2tx5VofxYQBTaYCyGtigOIJGhm8GeTa/Dg525JgIBHRxCog GhF3jZeM2drQK1T6IVQIuEbJJ0iELvrbVOsKf3SY1gKGljmUqNyaKbbZy2lM+PK6/6wA8m63A yJrpcsUGZ2b+dZLL2p0kVDNuAcKGqTDfxDqpsBOFiZvjgpwwxPBJsiFRiqsuvhTvm/1meIV1M BdWZ7XmwWAPjQ+Uestj79AeY/hLq8Hiib0H0KpcaV/sDhnl15f4S2LmQPj3D2iHeTaYntKxD7 K5bDE8ewKCSxYnJMt2FICQ7pOmDjqgd+QEROMuFMpxiNB2OPPj9Jvuy17gP4OIx07rsnQj88K z+DZftf1dC7Rv/famMTnDHGUloENwtr1cbAwAEeZuLS0MBtiHzEbfneqS6+VZe4v0Qp5o0Gzf oJHluSDB0eFPQjsM61QmOdmKaxM0vkCyISgSkdzF4/ax2em6gi+g/k8WR5G/TF776kIV91MMn 9dRtSN0qyFUIp0c8shKNfziz34PiTxY3NW8H8mHkK4RgXpor8AGVqsxMkTui4HL3R/fTsrO0N H2PCGb79bxNiYMfQQTQq+uCARudc/GzLuZiOkqyC/9xBmxJNXG38+kIrWs8pFxJUhCgycOx6+ JSMV1Bb+hbvM6qx5KTxPePxAitxOCAfanVbrlWF467TSYNXwruRPRY//98XJBwH9z/yWP2VJH TuZsm4pT1YpwOiS3SCVfE3nMjXPYal1boARSZWC5vaRSJOIrAQFZn1mZMFKFsMmDl/Sb+Vcq5 vbWu55tWUXP71+MGcqA4+6490gc=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/urn/gDB4UECG3B_jtsTK3WEVRU0jS10>
Subject: Re: [urn] Registration request for urn:thread:
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: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 10:03:09 -0000

To me, that sounds like a good solution that would ensure that the relevant
registry data is openly available while still allowing other parts to be
members-only.

Best,

Lars

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: urn [mailto:urn-bounces@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von Esko Dijk
Gesendet: Montag, 29. Januar 2024 09:45
An: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>; Dale R. Worley
<worley@ariadne.com>
Cc: urn@ietf.org
Betreff: Re: [urn] Registration request for urn:thread:

> Section 5.1 of RFC 8141 states:
>
>     Formal URN namespaces might be appropriate even when some
>     aspects are not fully open.  For example, a URN namespace might make
>     use of a fee-based, privately managed, or proprietary registry for
>     assignment of URNs in the URN namespace.  However, it might still
>     benefit some Internet users if the associated services have openly
>     published names.
>
> In this case, I would say that the letter of RFC 8141 overrides the 
> spirit of the IETF.

Indeed this section was the basis for including a privately managed
(members-only) and non-public registry in the request. (Non-public, because
viewing it requires accepting the EULA.) There is a suggestion there to have
at least the names - that are in the registry - published. That is something
we could add as a requirement for any entries in the internal registry, if
that helps?

The public version of the registry would be in a separate document that can
be downloaded from www.threadgroup.org without providing a name or accepting
a EULA. And each registered URN would provide the name and a short
description also.
Something like the table provided by 3GPP
(https://www.3gpp.org/3gpp-groups/core-network-terminals-ct/ct-wg1/uniform-r
esource-identifier-uri-list) for example.   It would then provide a link /
doc-reference pointing into the non-public specification.

Esko
_______________________________________________
urn mailing list
urn@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn