Re: [xmpp] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-xmpp-posh-04: (with COMMENT)

Barry Leiba <> Sat, 01 August 2015 01:50 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 859401A86FE; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 18:50:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.278
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kYVwwOhopgjL; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 18:50:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BDD01A86F7; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 18:50:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vkgc186 with SMTP id c186so26833715vkg.0; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 18:50:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=cAx3/pPoZLpV/0zq9fW28FAtEkEvy5jjqaW4Lweymr8=; b=PmkoRgTU0G8BgcJag7IZVF090H8PY7EDsmi1MDCDqgs2RkoiRQgaC8gKXEwXKc0B7t g8SidQWghqVsDBt4reZUnvmJDJWGbGLG3gOASUSlSVUbZ9UB8kmswsTOco2hp+wnS6Rv gAyGweCs6hRpDHUsrylC0xeb6FsFssTVYo+glu61qjQEI8ueMoH2GWS3jsGvMwtb/qNC iIMOhG2RHRlaeWdhsrS7iJh2EN1wf29u0j78KYH2Z5QzfOZ7kmnqDl615wsjyIblvWPI TB0knXzVWrwkUeBmt4Gwr1P5Iyq+DH36aTXLmQ+teNjwQYTFLrLmVqYf25SwOznFiRfI kBIQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id i5mr9230166vdk.52.1438393828869; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 18:50:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 18:50:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <>
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2015 03:50:28 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: u72BbfbVCcMhwrZxb-XpXqd5GAQ
Message-ID: <>
From: Barry Leiba <>
To: Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <>
Cc:,,,, The IESG <>,
Subject: Re: [xmpp] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-xmpp-posh-04: (with COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: XMPP Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2015 01:50:30 -0000

>> If you like, it could even do POSH service names and POSH format
>> names, and specify ".well-known/posh/<servicename>/<formatname>",
> Currently it's the <servicename> field that we're most interested in.

Right... and that's what I'm suggesting an FCFS registry for.  You
register "posh" in .well-known, and you create your own FCFS registry
for service names, and if you don't care about the format as a
separate thing, you just register "spice.json" (and so on) in your
FCFS registry.  That way, Mark doesn't get involved in approving
"posh.x" and "posh.y" and "posh.z", when Mark has no idea of what to
say about posh service names (or seedy ones, for that matter).

> Perhaps it makes sense to talk about it again with Mark?

Sounds like a plan.