Re: Request for well-known URI: opendiscovery

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Tue, 21 November 2017 02:13 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: wellknown-uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wellknown-uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E415124217 for <wellknown-uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 18:13:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.72
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=DmcJFk4N; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=ZlcRwLjr
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 X22qZ2p5WLIJ for <wellknown-uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 18:13:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 046371205F0 for <wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 18:13:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A45920C9D; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 21:13:55 -0500 (EST)
Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 21:13:55 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h=cc :content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=mgudCxAi643/NV7tXpu/pmlvRLjMyVi0uyW3gxjmkxI=; b=DmcJFk4N kf1SeuXbP/6Db/JpAK8OLQ6yyNW62SlfWmBcjOfrTX4RM/iSOMbNf8wVlkdfQhqU /52cHKpE4ExmtOSDEoVm58iS0J8fSDKqbSyNsqEDxIGPUw/Entjw83p5yLwevmJk f4OqBFPykoFvc0/hijWTc7lrskdLg1l8UY+KqMKBGjtNCHDAUhNVE2C3CHKAIUTD b71GEaFViS199vW8JUNh5Q2t/3sxVX4Ek5vR57tyi9osKR5txpMSA2TLZ2jnSaAQ Zy1MaWLlc47TlC1TA6lKEb4n7RPCsjjVosbW1xlsXuvMow/1kJSjqHvO1t7ejlX2 4EpqJVP3HasDmw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=mgudCxAi643/NV7tXpu/pmlvRLjMy Vi0uyW3gxjmkxI=; b=ZlcRwLjrzDqgqbLdmw+LtpzIxEiVsT9L8VBCjltpxvNWV GyzGkkJEaPKPZydANCe+rAbYcr+a46MZplAsaf0pDeAaHkJA2o36YAUSbCpwVhNZ CNru96yvw4tZ/RHl1+Y1MKEKPrFeq8Ho9AxLMiIo7aP/1Qar8g+QiGs2/9a8yT8l Uf8/w3gxVQ+i6hXmqwsIf9wnNrX75rjOvBRYfbtNzWwUhR90Pzgh4oiKb05gApqC ER6kY0k0hD4GF4D85uc1iliqyydmoy1k8TKqloZbGTLn2d3Ev02dJkEmZX5/xO/e u0F4+tzCsSP9KkuL9+6OLidYtae92vMbY3Y96Zu1g==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:44sTWiGXpxp-9l07vWzKE3UwxelL5sURAOxXxolDDN0a30Wr0CtKMg>
Received: from [192.168.1.18] (cpe-124-188-19-231.hdbq1.win.bigpond.net.au [124.188.19.231]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 6F1267F961; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 21:13:53 -0500 (EST)
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Message-Id: <44104BC0-FB75-46C5-902D-88E0FEBF3DF1@mnot.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_E27CB55F-22E0-4446-B874-167E46F4C4A1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.1 \(3445.4.7\))
Subject: Re: Request for well-known URI: opendiscovery
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 13:13:50 +1100
In-Reply-To: <4da0efc0-8d74-8bd7-d4fa-88011e43ace7@peercraft.com>
Cc: wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org
To: Henrik Biering <hb@peercraft.com>
References: <4da0efc0-8d74-8bd7-d4fa-88011e43ace7@peercraft.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.4.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wellknown-uri-review/unBWark9reA2c8iZjJHMGESD4io>
X-BeenThere: wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Well-Known URI review list <wellknown-uri-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wellknown-uri-review>, <mailto:wellknown-uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wellknown-uri-review/>
List-Post: <mailto:wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wellknown-uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wellknown-uri-review>, <mailto:wellknown-uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 02:13:59 -0000

Hi Henrik,

Sorry for the delay; IETF week (and the lead-up to it) tends to be all-consuming.

I see a couple of issues here:

1) As it is, the link you've provided isn't a sufficient reference; it is required to be "in sufficient detail so that interoperability between independent implementations is possible" <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8126#section-4.6>;. It also seems far from "sufficiently stable and permanent" (ibid.).

2) As per RFC5785, Section 1.1 explains inappropriate use of well-known URIs:

"""
well-known URIs are not intended for general information retrieval or establishment of large URI namespaces on the Web.  Rather, they are designed to facilitate discovery of information on a site when it isn't practical to use other mechanisms; for example, when discovering policy that needs to be evaluated before a resource is accessed, or when using multiple round-trips is judged detrimental to performance.
"""

It's hard to tell because the vagueness of the specification, but it seems like this mechanism is veering towards that. Have you explored other mechanisms, such as host-meta <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6415>?

Cheers,

P.S. I also see you're trying to use a HTTP header beginning with "X-"; this practice is deprecated in <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6648>;.



On 1 Nov 2017, at 4:30 am, Henrik Biering <hb@peercraft.com>; wrote:

> This is a request to register the well-known URI suffix “opendiscovery” allowing registered business entities to associate themselves with their online services and trusted third party claims, in order to make these easily discoverable without the need for a common third party.
> 
> Presently the project is at the "Proof of Concept" stage with a basic preliminary specification, but we would like to have the suffix registered now as it reflects the project name and we are in talks with both interested user groups and public authorities on how to organize the further standardization and implementation efforts for various business purposes.
> 
> The requested registry content is:
> 
> URI suffix:
> opendiscovery
> 
> Change controller:
> The OpenDiscovery Project
> https://www.opendiscovery.biz/
> info@opendiscovery.biz
> +45 46 96 56 36
> c/o Peercraft ApS, Aalandsgade 23, 2300 Copenhagen S, DENMARK
> 
> Specification document:
> https://www.opendiscovery.biz/specifications
> 
> Related information:
> https://www.opendiscovery.biz/
> (Project website with links to background docs and Github repositories)
> https://ec.europa.eu/futurium/en/blog/native-business-service-discovery-critical-issue-ngi
> (Relevance to the upcoming EU Next Generation Internet efforts https://ec.europa.eu/futurium/en/node/1460)
> -- 
> On behalf of the Opendiscovery Project,
> Henrik Biering
> CEO
> linkedin.com/in/hbiering
> 
> Peercraft ApS
> Aalandsgade 23
> 2300 Copenhagen S
> DENMARK
> 
> www.peercraft.com
> +45 46 96 56 36
> hb@peercraft.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wellknown-uri-review mailing list
> wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wellknown-uri-review

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/