Re: [webfinger] Question about device info discovery example.
"Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> Sat, 22 December 2012 05:26 UTC
Return-Path: <paulej@packetizer.com>
X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC6E021E8044 for <webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 21:26:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.549
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.049, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6Bl5f0SsTawc for <webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 21:26:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97F6921E8042 for <webfinger@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 21:26:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qBM5Q4wb004208 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 22 Dec 2012 00:26:05 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1356153965; bh=t7OZ+3+afMZs8ZZJ1kUgBi54uOBlR/UNCZSinJmdork=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=UpCOoMPdi/n4NhTjECCpTyXzUJZPhdtGta+xvtxXJ42/qlxHHeuMYO0Y+gQLWz1TA wJKcx9bo282Gj6z3YeZAgw7fg2odRrvRsYL7xBNZdUqveQJo0Ks12rx6V0yqKjKurY t79QDTiBsxZ4NURNQ1tYmx4+AsIao3kzhLsTAFZE=
From: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
To: 'nov matake' <matake@gmail.com>
References: <D6A97D9D-9431-4C0F-9428-397677C179D1@gmail.com> <075b01cde000$d283d790$778b86b0$@packetizer.com> <1B7C31D3-E41E-4DF2-910F-AC43340C62D6@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1B7C31D3-E41E-4DF2-910F-AC43340C62D6@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2012 00:26:07 -0500
Message-ID: <077601cde004$d8ae8760$8a0b9620$@packetizer.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0777_01CDDFDA.EFD9B7E0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQIeIapXe7gOJ5OOW00neyp/e43xxwISwboRAW9vMOSXZ7LXYA==
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Question about device info discovery example.
X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area <webfinger.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/webfinger>, <mailto:webfinger-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/webfinger>
List-Post: <mailto:webfinger@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:webfinger-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger>, <mailto:webfinger-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2012 05:26:09 -0000
Nov, The host to query for the acct URI should be the host portion following the @. For example, if one's email ID is "user@nc.example.com" then the host to be queried would be nc.example.com. That would be true for mailto, also. For http(s): URIs like "http://www.example.com/some/path/", there are one of two possibilities. In the examples, I've suggested that to one would query the host "example.com". However, it probably isn't the right place. In the case of an http: URI, perhaps queries should be directed to the host itself (in this case www.example.com). We need to answer that question: do we direct queries to the parent "host" (as I have it in the examples) or to the named host in the URI? Paul From: nov matake [mailto:matake@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2012 12:10 AM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Question about device info discovery example. OK, Then basically webfinger clients MUST use the host of resource parameter (at least when using acct, mailto, http and https schema), but extension spec MAY define another rule and in that case, client MUST follow the extension's rule. Is it right? Or webfinger itself doesn't specify anything for host usage? (It just define path "/.well-known/webfinger" and schema "https", but not host?) On 2012/12/22, at 13:57, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote: Nov, Keep in mind that this is an entirely fictional example. There isn't even a URI scheme called "device". The answer to your question would come from a document (if it existed, but does not) that describes the "device" URI and how to use it within the context of WebFinger. My thinking when I wrote this is that there are named devices on the network and one would query the parent domain to learn about the device. The parent in this case being <http://example.com> example.com. It might be that there is a designated host that serves as the device info server called " <http://devices.example.com> devices.example.com" to which all queries are directed. In any case, this is completely unspecified and the example is there only to illustrate the range of use for WebFinger. It should not be viewed in any way as proper usage, though. Paul From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of nov matake Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 11:40 PM To: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: [webfinger] Question about device info discovery example. Hi all, I'm new to this ML. I'm writing a ruby webfinger library. <https://rubygems.org/gems/webfinger> https://rubygems.org/gems/webfinger After reading usecases in section 3, I have a question. In the device info discovery example in section 3.4, resource is "device:p1. <http://example.com/> example.com" but the host of discovery endpoint is " <http://example.com/> example.com", not " <http://p1.example.com/> p1.example.com". Is there any reason why these hosts are different? How did the client decide the host of the discovery endpoint from resource URI? Thanks Nov Matake
- [webfinger] Question about device info discovery … nov matake
- Re: [webfinger] Question about device info discov… Paul E. Jones
- Re: [webfinger] Question about device info discov… nov matake
- Re: [webfinger] Question about device info discov… Paul E. Jones
- Re: [webfinger] Question about device info discov… Paul E. Jones
- Re: [webfinger] Question about device info discov… nov matake
- Re: [webfinger] Question about device info discov… Paul E. Jones
- Re: [webfinger] Question about device info discov… nov matake