From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jul 2 13:59:04 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C31953A6A2C; Wed, 2 Jul 2008 13:59:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E8FF3A694F for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2008 13:59:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.949 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.649, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CI+EoJ1hUpGx for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2008 13:59:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gateout01.mbox.net (gateout01.mbox.net [165.212.64.21]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C06EF3A6927 for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2008 13:59:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gateout01 (gwsmtp.usa.net [165.212.65.102]) by gateout01.mbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DAD6CDF70; Wed, 2 Jul 2008 20:59:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GW1.EXCHPROD.USA.NET [165.212.116.254] by gateout01 via smtad (C8.MAIN.3.44O) with ESMTP id XID806mgBu8H7293Xo1; Wed, 02 Jul 2008 20:59:07 -0000 X-USANET-Source: 165.212.116.254 IN ldusseault@commerce.net GW1.EXCHPROD.USA.NET X-USANET-MsgId: XID806mgBu8H7293Xo1 Received: from [10.1.1.145] ([157.22.41.236]) by GW1.EXCHPROD.USA.NET over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 2 Jul 2008 14:56:23 -0600 Message-Id: <610A8A0E-7464-496C-B736-592C612BBAB4@commerce.net> From: Lisa Dusseault To: Lisa Dusseault's Chairs , Apps Discuss Subject: Lisa's Apps Area Activity Report for June 2008 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v924) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 13:59:02 -0700 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.924) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Jul 2008 20:56:24.0049 (UTC) FILETIME=[16740610:01C8DC86] X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0986976677==" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org --===============0986976677== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-1-501941791 --Apple-Mail-1-501941791 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit News, updates IMAPEXT WG closed down with publication of its various RFCs (see below) . My vacation plans: July 4 to 12, July 22-25, Aug 4-5, Aug 11-15 Apps Meetings and related in Dublin Jul 28 0900: Applications Area Open Meeting 1520: IDNABIS 1740: EAI Jul 29 0900: HTTPBIS Also this time slot: ALTO BOF: "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization" 1300: Not apps but related: TSVAREA has Stanislav Shalunov talking about BitTorrent's protocol 1520: IDNABIS Jul 30 0900: MORG BOF: Message Organization Jul 31 0900: VCardDav 1300: SIEVE Also this time slot: TANA BOF: "Techniques for Advanced Networking Applications" Aug 1 0900: LEMONADE In case you missed it when first announced like I did, the Peer-to- Peer discussions related to the TANA and ALTO BOFs and the workshop back in May, are on the list "p2pi@ietf.org" Document Status and Progress Active Documents: my action - draft-sanchez-webdav-current-principal (Proposed Standard): Did AD review. Need to look up whether this functionality already exists. - draft-ietf-sieve-editheader (Proposed Standard): IESG Evaluation resulted in a few changes. Checking RFC Editor notes with doc shepherd. - draft-adolf-dvb-urn (Informational): Checking with other ADs to see if we can approve publication of this document. Stalled, in review, waiting on other: - draft-ietf-calsify-rfc2445bis (Proposed Standard): Discussing issues that came up in AD Review with WG. Expect new version at some point? - draft-ietf-lemonade-msgevent (Proposed Standard): Last call finished, waiting for authors to deal with last call input - draft-snell-atompub-bidi (Proposed Standard): A couple changes probably required after IESG Evaluation. - draft-resnick-2822upd (Draft Standard): Just needs an impl'n report to be approved by IESG. - draft-klensin-rfc2821bis (Draft Standard): Under appeal. - draft-ietf-eai-dsn (Experimental): In IESG Evaluation - draft-ietf-sieve-notify-mailto: Finished IETF Last Call, IANA has issues Finished Processing -- new in RFC Ed queue and new RFCs - draft-freed-sieve-date-index (Proposed Standard): Now in RFC Queue - draft-monrad-sipping-3gpp-urn-namespace (Informational): Now in RFC Queue - RFC 5257, Experimental "IMAP ANNOTATE Extension" - RFC 4551, Proposed Standard "IMAP Extension for Conditional STORE operation or quick flag changes resynchronization" - RFC 5255, Proposed Standard "Internet Message Access Protocol Internationalization" - RFC 5258, Proposed Standard "IMAP4 LIST Command Extensions" - RFC 5256, Proposed Standard "INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - SORT AND THREAD EXTENSIONS" WG Status CALSIFY: WG discussing 2445bis issues raised by AD. HTTPBIS: See summary of activity: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2008AprJun/0397.html IDNABIS: Two sessions scheduled for Dublin. . SIEVE: Recharter is up for IESG Evaluation. USEFOR: No activity. --Apple-Mail-1-501941791 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

News, = updates

IMAPEXT WG closed down with = publication of its various RFCs (see below) = . 

My vacation plans: July 4 to 12, July = 22-25, Aug 4-5, Aug 11-15

Apps Meetings and = related in Dublin
Jul 28 0900: = Applications Area Open Meeting
= 1520: IDNABIS
1740: = EAI
Jul 29 0900: = HTTPBIS
= Also this time slot: ALTO BOF: "Application-Layer Traffic = Optimization"
1300: Not apps = but related: TSVAREA has Stanislav Shalunov talking about BitTorrent's = protocol 
1520: = IDNABIS
Jul 30 0900: = MORG BOF: Message Organization
Jul 31 0900: = VCardDav
1300: = SIEVE
= Also this time slot: TANA BOF: "Techniques for Advanced = Networking Applications"
Aug 1 0900: = LEMONADE

In case you missed it when first = announced like I did, the Peer-to-Peer discussions related to the TANA = and ALTO BOFs and the workshop back in May, are on the list "p2pi@ietf.org" 

Document Status and = Progress

Active Documents: my action
 - draft-sanchez-webdav-current-principal = (Proposed Standard): Did AD review.  Need to look up whether this = functionality already exists.

 - draft-ietf-calsify-rfc2445bis (Proposed = Standard):  Discussing issues that came up in AD Review with WG. = Expect new version at some point?
 - draft-resnick-2822upd (Draft Standard): = Just needs an impl'n report to be approved by IESG.
 - draft-klensin-rfc2821bis (Draft = Standard): Under appeal.
 - = draft-ietf-sieve-notify-mailto:  Finished IETF Last Call, IANA has = issues  =

Finished = Processing -- new in RFC Ed queue and new RFCs
 - draft-freed-sieve-date-index (Proposed = Standard): Now in RFC Queue
 - = draft-monrad-sipping-3gpp-urn-namespace (Informational): Now in RFC = Queue
 - RFC 5257, = Experimental
"IMAP ANNOTATE = Extension"
 - RFC 4551, Proposed = Standard
"IMAP Extension for Conditional = STORE operation or quick flag changes resynchronization"
 - RFC 5255, Proposed Standard
"Internet Message Access Protocol = Internationalization"
 - RFC 5258, Proposed = Standard
"IMAP4 LIST Command = Extensions"
 - RFC 5256, Proposed = Standard
"INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL = - SORT AND THREAD EXTENSIONS"

WG Status
  = CALSIFY: WG discussing 2445bis issues raised by AD.
  IDNABIS:  Two = sessions scheduled for Dublin. .
  USEFOR: No activity. =  
= --Apple-Mail-1-501941791-- --===============0986976677== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss --===============0986976677==-- From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 7 06:50:58 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 150913A6A5D; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 06:50:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C6493A6A5F for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 06:50:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7a9IM6RCTwsq for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 06:50:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [151.201.22.177]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93BED3A65A6 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 06:50:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 215469EBEB0; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:50:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at daboo.name Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (chewy.mulberrymail.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8ov2qCCz0RKs; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:50:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from caldav.corp.apple.com (unknown [17.101.32.44]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id B374D9EBEA9; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:50:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 09:50:53 -0400 From: Cyrus Daboo To: apps-discuss@ietf.org, Cullen Jennings Subject: draft-jennings-http-srv-00 Message-ID: X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a1 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Hi, Just saw this posted: . I am in the process of defining SRV record lookups for CalDAV and CardDAV as well. The HTTP SRV draft proposes both an 'http' and an 'https' service type. However, comments here: for the https service suggest that 'https' should not be used. What do people think? Should there be a separate 'https' SRV service type? If so, then should I define both 'caldav'/'caldavs' and 'carddav'/'carddavs', or instead just rely on the http redirect approach with a single service type? Or perhaps, 'caldav' and 'carddav' should be specified in terms of the http service, e.g. 'caldav.http' and 'caldav.https'. Also, why isn't there an IANA registry of SRV service types? The port numbers registry is not sufficient. -- Cyrus Daboo _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 7 07:25:10 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 356533A6A7B; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 07:25:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 709263A6A81; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 07:25:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.241 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.241 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.358, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jgkXJiSJRPh8; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 07:25:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-mx09.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [192.100.105.134]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACF8C3A6A7A; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 07:25:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh105.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.31]) by mgw-mx09.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.6/Switch-3.2.6) with ESMTP id m67EOvVc010751; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 09:25:09 -0500 Received: from vaebh103.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.160.244.24]) by vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 7 Jul 2008 17:24:38 +0300 Received: from esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.183]) by vaebh103.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 7 Jul 2008 17:24:37 +0300 Received: from net-47.nrpn.net ([10.241.184.208]) by esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 7 Jul 2008 17:24:36 +0300 Message-Id: From: Lars Eggert To: ext Cyrus Daboo In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926) Subject: Re: draft-jennings-http-srv-00 Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 17:24:28 +0300 References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jul 2008 14:24:37.0449 (UTC) FILETIME=[2F7E4390:01C8E03D] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Cc: port-srv-reg@ietf.org, apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org On 2008-7-7, at 16:50, ext Cyrus Daboo wrote: > Also, why isn't there an IANA registry of SRV service types? The > port numbers registry is not sufficient. FYI, some transport folks have started to bring the documented IANA ports guidelines in line with reality. (Watch for draft-ietf-tsvwg- iana-ports-00 later today.) Part of that effort is to finally move the SRV registry over to IANA, but that hasn't happened yet. But it's on the to-do list. Lars _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 7 07:42:54 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0EC03A6A64; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 07:42:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61FFD3A6A64; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 07:42:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FfnsHAmsv-r8; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 07:42:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from office.denic.de (gw-office.denic.de [81.91.160.182]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAC8B3A67E3; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 07:42:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from x27.adm.denic.de ([10.122.64.128]) by office.denic.de with esmtp id 1KFrva-0001jT-B7; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 16:42:54 +0200 Received: from localhost by x27.adm.denic.de with local id 1KFruY-0002lB-Jh; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 16:41:50 +0200 Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 16:41:50 +0200 From: Peter Koch To: Lars Eggert Subject: Re: draft-jennings-http-srv-00 Message-ID: <20080707144150.GJ24221@x27.adm.denic.de> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: port-srv-reg@ietf.org, apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 05:24:28PM +0300, Lars Eggert wrote: > On 2008-7-7, at 16:50, ext Cyrus Daboo wrote: > >Also, why isn't there an IANA registry of SRV service types? The > >port numbers registry is not sufficient. we've had this topic in DNSOP more than once when it came to review of documents trying to make use of SRV. There is no registry and RFC 2782 has the Applicability Statement for a reason. Ironically, during the processing of RFC 2782 the use of http as an example was carefully avoided. > FYI, some transport folks have started to bring the documented IANA > ports guidelines in line with reality. (Watch for draft-ietf-tsvwg- > iana-ports-00 later today.) > > Part of that effort is to finally move the SRV registry over to IANA, > but that hasn't happened yet. But it's on the to-do list. There are a couple of DNS caveats, including, but not limited to, "backwards compatibility" issues especially in those cases where SRV is retroactively introduced for existing services. I'm looking forward to the draft you mentioned. -Peter _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 7 08:08:23 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BF423A68F6; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 08:08:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 296083A68D7; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 08:08:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id e2oNTFSGgyQh; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 08:08:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-5.cisco.com (sj-iport-5.cisco.com [171.68.10.87]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 643DD3A67E3; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 08:08:21 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.30,316,1212364800"; d="scan'208";a="35715750" Received: from sj-dkim-3.cisco.com ([171.71.179.195]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Jul 2008 15:08:28 +0000 Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-3.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m67F8SG0024782; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 08:08:28 -0700 Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.194]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m67F8RfD004966; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 15:08:27 GMT From: "Dan Wing" To: "'Peter Koch'" , "'Lars Eggert'" References: <20080707144150.GJ24221@x27.adm.denic.de> Subject: RE: draft-jennings-http-srv-00 Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 08:08:27 -0700 Message-ID: <02fd01c8e043$4f5b3ff0$c2f0200a@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: AcjgQI9+8jEL1FbVQZqPL1JaFeL0nQAAnOkA In-Reply-To: <20080707144150.GJ24221@x27.adm.denic.de> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=672; t=1215443308; x=1216307308; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim3002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=dwing@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Dan=20Wing=22=20 |Subject:=20RE=3A=20draft-jennings-http-srv-00 |Sender:=20; bh=vJbRXCHfwatyl4IIeZgnMSz34wEGueb1VAyfiHBmgrM=; b=VFZkU2ss6dIJS+UXnMnvUgaJRhhOJxNP5uKPCndBDwb9jYVJNif+SgmwEc 9+2PeXbTxyOF5uItQb/E1fXW+8Eg+uCVrGlwcLaHsmAEjAODhGTmRC8M9xBN yF32WbxEph; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-3; header.From=dwing@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim3002 verified; ); Cc: port-srv-reg@ietf.org, apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org > > Part of that effort is to finally move the SRV registry > > over to IANA, but that hasn't happened yet. But it's on > > the to-do list. > > There are a couple of DNS caveats, including, but not limited > to, "backwards compatibility" issues especially in those cases > where SRV is retroactively introduced for existing services. Like when MX was introduced. HTTP, at least, would be easier, as an HTTP redirect can point 'legacy' clients towards the correct resource. Such redirection was not possible with SMTP. Safari has experience with SRV queries; we should ask Stuart Cheshire (who is now on the IAB) to share their experiences. -d _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 7 08:13:34 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 167773A6A4D; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 08:13:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23CAB3A6A4C; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 08:13:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8AS3dxvCSPTy; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 08:13:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [151.201.22.177]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DE113A67B6; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 08:13:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D2CB9ECA4D; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 11:13:37 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at daboo.name Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (chewy.mulberrymail.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CAL7xpCEC6Rm; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 11:13:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from caldav.corp.apple.com (unknown [17.101.32.44]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 904D59ECA2F; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 11:13:34 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 11:13:32 -0400 From: Cyrus Daboo To: Dan Wing , 'Peter Koch' , 'Lars Eggert' Subject: RE: draft-jennings-http-srv-00 Message-ID: <12444A314100D67726433C54@caldav.corp.apple.com> In-Reply-To: <02fd01c8e043$4f5b3ff0$c2f0200a@cisco.com> References: <20080707144150.GJ24221@x27.adm.denic.de> <02fd01c8e043$4f5b3ff0$c2f0200a@cisco.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a1 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Cc: port-srv-reg@ietf.org, apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Hi Dan, --On July 7, 2008 8:08:27 AM -0700 Dan Wing wrote: > Safari has experience with SRV queries; we should ask Stuart > Cheshire (who is now on the IAB) to share their experiences. Take a look at the http and https definitions at which I think is fairly representative of what is going on. But these discussions should definitely involve Stuart too. -- Cyrus Daboo _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 7 13:25:26 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 591BC3A6B13; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 13:25:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE7DA3A685D for ; Sun, 6 Jul 2008 21:08:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TzxF7mrjM6N8 for ; Sun, 6 Jul 2008 21:08:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com (sj-iport-1.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD6E53A681B for ; Sun, 6 Jul 2008 21:08:36 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.30,313,1212364800"; d="scan'208";a="49284573" Received: from sj-dkim-1.cisco.com ([171.71.179.21]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Jul 2008 04:08:42 +0000 Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m6748gVA032176 for ; Sun, 6 Jul 2008 21:08:42 -0700 Received: from [192.168.4.2] (sjc-fluffy-vpn1.cisco.com [10.25.236.82]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id m6748g7a000523 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 04:08:42 GMT Message-Id: <63AFF53C-C194-4DE3-B603-5B94F08FB1AD@cisco.com> From: Cullen Jennings To: apps-discuss@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=Apple-Mail-6-873434286 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926) Subject: draft-jennings-http-srv-00.txt Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 21:10:35 -0700 References: <20080707024501.AAFB13A6A00@core3.amsl.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2047; t=1215403722; x=1216267722; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim1004; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=fluffy@cisco.com; z=From:=20Cullen=20Jennings=20 |Subject:=20draft-jennings-http-srv-00.txt=20 |Sender:=20; bh=aG1TjWczLIexknL6EIHRF2MMv/zYIn8OAw41LOeizHE=; b=mMuvD3+5KosQOGrrCgahbRBvr6uOYaXg9OL2XrQdkeopQxBbEGWA3SFgO8 LkxYVubNMhRDnuSDZUohh8wHsY7ZOqWoC5gmDBsKheiJ9w2G9lZtOCJNIA+N kqgw0HqURAJPSbbret1YYY9VfnOcsA9RSgzhRWf55Xc/Y4Ldj/iag=; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-1; header.From=fluffy@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim1004 verified; ); X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:25:25 -0700 X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org --Apple-Mail-6-873434286 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This draft proposes the age old idea of using SRV records for HTTP. I love to get peoples thoughts over the next month or so. Thanks, Cullen Begin forwarded message: > From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > Date: July 6, 2008 7:45:01 PM PDT (CA) > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Subject: I-D Action:draft-jennings-http-srv-00.txt > Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > > Title : DNS SRV Records for HTTP > Author(s) : C. Jennings > Filename : draft-jennings-http-srv-00.txt > Pages : 5 > Date : 2008-07-06 > > This document specifies a mechanism for an HTTP client to perform a > DNS SRV lookup to find an HTTP server. > > The draft is being discussed on the apps-discuss@ietf.org list. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jennings-http-srv-00.txt > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > Internet-Draft. --Apple-Mail-6-873434286 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=mime-attachment Content-Type: message/external-body; x-unix-mode=0666; name="mime-attachment" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID: <2008-07-06193948.I-D@ietf.org>

--Apple-Mail-6-873434286 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt --Apple-Mail-6-873434286 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss --Apple-Mail-6-873434286-- From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 7 13:25:26 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75A7628C16F; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 13:25:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9770B3A681B for ; Sun, 6 Jul 2008 21:10:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GQHlRWja86PF for ; Sun, 6 Jul 2008 21:10:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com (sj-iport-1.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 605683A685D for ; Sun, 6 Jul 2008 21:10:27 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.30,313,1212364800"; d="scan'208";a="49285139" Received: from sj-dkim-2.cisco.com ([171.71.179.186]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Jul 2008 04:10:32 +0000 Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (sj-core-5.cisco.com [171.71.177.238]) by sj-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m674AWmN019420 for ; Sun, 6 Jul 2008 21:10:32 -0700 Received: from [192.168.4.2] (sjc-fluffy-vpn1.cisco.com [10.25.236.82]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id m674AWVj029092 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 04:10:32 GMT Message-Id: <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> From: Cullen Jennings To: apps-discuss@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=Apple-Mail-10-873543823 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926) Subject: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 21:12:24 -0700 References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2138; t=1215403832; x=1216267832; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim2002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=fluffy@cisco.com; z=From:=20Cullen=20Jennings=20 |Subject:=20draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 |Sender:=20; bh=a5+RiPgXd5cwxNp/JN89H8FWNc2kks7be4F5+nnsnsY=; b=Z2yB1JbV7FHxy5TFIN/8X+bDDtlZEXoXuPpVKTR0m66ipZXVPRJAleFMl8 K3Sg3yNovQXDEcl6RiM0m0U+BrAUtv9cJuKhbYtV/yKX5bQBXqoq0IAQojNd uF6ShFydGI; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-2; header.From=fluffy@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim2002 verified; ); X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:25:25 -0700 X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org --Apple-Mail-10-873543823 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The draft proposes a HTTP based API to update DNS records similar to the system at dyndns.org. Be pleased to get peoples thoughts but I'm going to be slow responding due until after the Dublin meeting. Thanks, Cullen Begin forwarded message: > From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > Date: July 6, 2008 7:45:01 PM PDT (CA) > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Subject: I-D Action:draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00.txt > Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > > Title : HTTP API for Updating DNS Records > Author(s) : C. Jennings > Filename : draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00.txt > Pages : 9 > Date : 2008-07-06 > > This specification defines a simple HTTP based scheme for clients to > update DNS records. > > The draft is being discussed on the apps-discuss@ietf.org list. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00.txt > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > Internet-Draft. --Apple-Mail-10-873543823 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=mime-attachment Content-Type: message/external-body; x-unix-mode=0666; name="mime-attachment" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID: <2008-07-06194008.I-D@ietf.org>

--Apple-Mail-10-873543823 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt --Apple-Mail-10-873543823 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss --Apple-Mail-10-873543823-- From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 7 14:11:14 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 812CE3A6B3C; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 14:11:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 351593A6A2E for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 14:11:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ymdVyfWnZ-HO for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 14:11:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com (wolverine01.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.254]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F02E13A6B49 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 14:11:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qualcomm.com; i=hardie@qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1215465079; x=1247001079; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:to: from:subject:content-type:x-ironport-av; z=MIME-Version:=201.0|Message-ID:=20|In-Reply-To:=20<63AFF53C-C194-4DE3-B603 -5B94F08FB1AD@cisco.com>|References:=20<20080707024501.AA FB13A6A00@core3.amsl.com>=0D=0A=20<63AFF53C-C194-4DE3-B60 3-5B94F08FB1AD@cisco.com>|Date:=20Mon,=207=20Jul=202008 =2014:11:15=20-0700|To:=20Cullen=20Jennings=20,=0D=0A=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20"apps-discuss@ietf. org"=0D=0A=09|From:=20Ted=20Hardie =20|Subject:=20Re:=20draft-jennings- http-srv-00.txt|Content-Type:=20text/plain=3B=20charset =3D"us-ascii"|X-IronPort-AV:=20E=3DMcAfee=3Bi=3D"5200,216 0,5333"=3B=20a=3D"4506307"; bh=zVQCCIq78ZOcykC93mytCXIAU8qzEl0Kr67S4tmeie4=; b=Xn+yMeF0eU0H8OrDmWCA1f+ILAoEs3i6VKMaT1Sh6FPO77AFrYGvZ/dK CV7Rag7ER7NyANaD9WLIG+fvoi2jEjz/XNkqixI5OOsOCKy0wS7YpHzfs BrqRn4oLBPZXMCRUbU+I9wc7nWrNI0KvdUQDnNIoohcbAaOyMie/3rQHM 4=; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5200,2160,5333"; a="4506307" Received: from pdmz-ns-mip.qualcomm.com (HELO numenor.qualcomm.com) ([199.106.114.10]) by wolverine01.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 07 Jul 2008 14:11:19 -0700 Received: from msgtransport01.qualcomm.com (msgtransport01.qualcomm.com [129.46.61.148]) by numenor.qualcomm.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/1.0) with ESMTP id m67LBIJn022687 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 7 Jul 2008 14:11:19 -0700 Received: from nasanexhc03.na.qualcomm.com (nasanexhc03.na.qualcomm.com [172.30.33.34]) by msgtransport01.qualcomm.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/1.0) with ESMTP id m67LBIcg000876 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 7 Jul 2008 14:11:18 -0700 Received: from [10.133.18.135] (10.50.16.140) by qcmail1.qualcomm.com (172.30.33.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.278.0; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 14:11:17 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <63AFF53C-C194-4DE3-B603-5B94F08FB1AD@cisco.com> References: <20080707024501.AAFB13A6A00@core3.amsl.com> <63AFF53C-C194-4DE3-B603-5B94F08FB1AD@cisco.com> Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 14:11:15 -0700 To: Cullen Jennings , "apps-discuss@ietf.org" From: Ted Hardie Subject: Re: draft-jennings-http-srv-00.txt X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org At 9:10 PM -0700 7/6/08, Cullen Jennings wrote: >This draft proposes the age old idea of using SRV records for HTTP. I >love to get peoples thoughts over the next month or so. > >Thanks, Cullen > Those tiny, white specks you see on the horizon, bobbing up and down on the waves of change are on a ship. That ship might, using a powerful set of lenses, see the ship that has sailed off carrying this idea. >From where we stand, we cannot even see that ship any more. It is far, far below our horizon. Having standard browsers change behavior on this one falls into the category of "not very likely", to put it mildly. You give as one of your driving use cases: For example, a portal such as Facebook often acts a web client and calls specific HTTP-based APIs on other web servers. These APIs may require the use of this specification. In this situation, the end user's web browser might not do the SRV lookup when it browsed to the portal web pages, but the HTTP calls that the portal made out to other sites to generate the content would use this mechanism. That would create a (possibly temporary, possibly permanent) situation in which different classes of application did different things to resolve the same URI scheme. Given that the same device could have both applications (e.g. browser and web server on the same desktop/laptop), that means they would have to call different libraries or have code specific to the API. As we've discovered in the land of Unicode versioning, relying on the version of the library you access is tricky and not very likely to work. So we really need new APIs completely for this and some way of disambiguating the situations in which you call them vs. today's HTTP. Re-using the same scheme for this makes it very hard to get that right. (And I suspect the security considerations of both coexisting for the foreseeable future are more than your draft suggests). If facebook needs this, they can mint a new URI scheme and run up a U-NAPTR mechanism that allows them to do cool re-writing. That gets them a lot more than port numbers (which, in internal APIs aren't klugy enough to matter much). I'd encourage registration of that scheme, naturally, but since it is in internal APIs, most things won't have to know or care. If there turns out to be a groundswell of need for interoperability among these APIs, we can produce some new scheme that covers that need. But re-using the string HTTP for it doesn't seem like a good idea to me. I know I fall on the extreme end of the "strings are cheap" view of URI schemes, but I think I'm squarely in the middle of "ambiguity is expensive". At this stage, this proposal creates ambiguity (is this X old enough to do A/AAAA only or will it do SRV then A/AAAA?) for something that seems easily handled in other ways. two cents, Ted >Begin forwarded message: > >> From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org >> Date: July 6, 2008 7:45:01 PM PDT (CA) >> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >> Subject: I-D Action:draft-jennings-http-srv-00.txt >> Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org >> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >> directories. >> >> Title : DNS SRV Records for HTTP >> Author(s) : C. Jennings >> Filename : draft-jennings-http-srv-00.txt >> Pages : 5 >> Date : 2008-07-06 >> >> This document specifies a mechanism for an HTTP client to perform a >> DNS SRV lookup to find an HTTP server. >> >> The draft is being discussed on the apps-discuss@ietf.org list. >> >> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jennings-http-srv-00.txt >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader >> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > > Internet-Draft. > >Content-Type: message/external-body; name="mime-attachment" >Content-Description: mime-attachment >Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="mime-attachment"; size=330; > creation-date="Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:25:42 GMT"; > modification-date="Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:25:42 GMT" > >Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="mime-attachment" >Content-Type: message/external-body; x-unix-mode=0666; > name="mime-attachment" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID: <2008-07-06193948.I-D@ietf.org>

> >Content-Type: text/plain; name="ATT00001.txt" >Content-Description: ATT00001.txt >Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ATT00001.txt"; size=336; > creation-date="Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:25:42 GMT"; > modification-date="Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:25:42 GMT" > >Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:ATT00001 2704.txt (TEXT/ttxt) (007EB89D) >Content-Type: text/plain; name="ATT00002.txt" >Content-Description: ATT00002.txt >Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ATT00002.txt"; size=215; > creation-date="Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:25:42 GMT"; > modification-date="Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:25:42 GMT" > >Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:ATT00002 687.txt (TEXT/ttxt) (007EB89E) _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 7 15:01:54 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8971C28C2EC; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 15:01:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFADA28C2EA for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 15:01:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.305 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.305 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.294, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DTxLSkd1RCt5 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 15:01:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B348828C2E9 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 15:01:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=p3.JCK.COM) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1KFymI-000Bw7-VQ; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:01:47 -0400 Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:01:45 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: Ted Hardie , Cullen Jennings , apps-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: draft-jennings-http-srv-00.txt Message-ID: <025364F4B4C9F33F0C35D31A@p3.JCK.COM> In-Reply-To: References: <20080707024501.AAFB13A6A00@core3.amsl.com> <63AFF53C-C194-4DE3-B603-5B94F08FB1AD@cisco.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org I rarely do this, but +1 emphatically. One URI scheme, one resolution mechanism. john --On Monday, 07 July, 2008 14:11 -0700 Ted Hardie wrote: > At 9:10 PM -0700 7/6/08, Cullen Jennings wrote: >> This draft proposes the age old idea of using SRV records for >> HTTP. I love to get peoples thoughts over the next month or >> so. >> >> Thanks, Cullen >> > > Those tiny, white specks you see on the horizon, bobbing up and > down on the waves of change are on a ship. That ship might, > using a powerful set of lenses, see the ship that has sailed > off carrying this idea. From where we stand, we cannot even > see that ship any more. It is far, far below our horizon. > > Having standard browsers change behavior on this one falls > into the category of "not very likely", to put it mildly. You > give as one of your driving use cases: > > For example, a portal such as Facebook often acts a web > client and calls specific HTTP-based APIs on other web > servers. These APIs may require the use of this > specification. In this situation, the end user's web > browser might not do the SRV lookup when it browsed to the > portal web pages, but the HTTP calls that the portal made out > to other sites to generate the content would use this > mechanism. > > That would create a (possibly temporary, possibly permanent) > situation in which different classes of application did > different things to resolve the same URI scheme. Given that > the same device could have both applications (e.g. browser and > web server on the same desktop/laptop), that means they would > have to call different libraries or have code specific to the > API. As we've discovered in the land of Unicode versioning, > relying on the version of the library you access is tricky and > not very likely to work. So we really need new APIs > completely for this and some way of disambiguating the > situations in which you call them vs. today's HTTP. Re-using > the same scheme for this makes it very hard to get that right. > (And I suspect the security considerations of both coexisting > for the foreseeable future are more than your draft suggests). > > If facebook needs this, they can mint a new URI scheme and run > up a U-NAPTR mechanism that allows them to do cool re-writing. > That gets them a lot more than port numbers (which, in internal > APIs aren't klugy enough to matter much). I'd encourage > registration of that scheme, naturally, but since it is in > internal APIs, most things won't have to know or care. If > there turns out to be a groundswell of need for > interoperability among these APIs, we can produce some new > scheme that covers that need. But re-using the string HTTP > for it doesn't seem like a good idea to me. > > I know I fall on the extreme end of the "strings are cheap" > view of URI schemes, but I think I'm squarely in the middle of > "ambiguity is expensive". At this stage, this proposal creates > ambiguity (is this X old enough to do A/AAAA only or will it > do SRV then A/AAAA?) for something that seems easily handled > in other ways. > > two cents, > Ted > > > > > > > > >> Begin forwarded message: >> >>> From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org >>> Date: July 6, 2008 7:45:01 PM PDT (CA) >>> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >>> Subject: I-D Action:draft-jennings-http-srv-00.txt >>> Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org >>> >>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line >>> Internet-Drafts directories. >>> >>> Title : DNS SRV Records for HTTP >>> Author(s) : C. Jennings >>> Filename : draft-jennings-http-srv-00.txt >>> Pages : 5 >>> Date : 2008-07-06 >>> >>> This document specifies a mechanism for an HTTP client to >>> perform a DNS SRV lookup to find an HTTP server. >>> >>> The draft is being discussed on the apps-discuss@ietf.org >>> list. >>> >>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jennings-http-srv >> > -00.txt >>> >>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >>> >>> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail >>> reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII >>> version of the Internet-Draft. >> >> Content-Type: message/external-body; name="mime-attachment" >> Content-Description: mime-attachment >> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="mime-attachment"; >> size=330; creation-date="Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:25:42 GMT"; >> modification-date="Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:25:42 GMT" >> >> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="mime-attachment" >> Content-Type: message/external-body; x-unix-mode=0666; >> name="mime-attachment" >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> >> Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID: >> <2008-07-06193948.I-D@ietf.org>

>> >> Content-Type: text/plain; name="ATT00001.txt" >> Content-Description: ATT00001.txt >> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ATT00001.txt"; >> size=336; creation-date="Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:25:42 GMT"; >> modification-date="Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:25:42 GMT" >> >> Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:ATT00001 2704.txt >> (TEXT/ttxt) (007EB89D) Content-Type: text/plain; >> name="ATT00002.txt" >> Content-Description: ATT00002.txt >> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ATT00002.txt"; >> size=215; creation-date="Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:25:42 GMT"; >> modification-date="Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:25:42 GMT" >> >> Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:ATT00002 687.txt >> (TEXT/ttxt) (007EB89E) > > _______________________________________________ > Apps-Discuss mailing list > Apps-Discuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 7 20:15:05 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AE1D3A697E; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 20:15:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE9BC3A6973 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 20:15:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.919 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.278, BAYES_00=-2.599, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=0.044, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=3.196, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eFH1LFN14QSp for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 20:15:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF1B73A68FD for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 20:15:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from root by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KG3fT-0000jm-1O for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 03:15:03 +0000 Received: from rain.gmane.org ([80.91.229.7]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 03:15:03 +0000 Received: from hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz by rain.gmane.org with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 03:15:03 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: apps-discuss@ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" Subject: Re: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 01:43:07 +0200 Organization: Lines: 43 Message-ID: References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com> <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: rain.gmane.org X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1914 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Cullen Jennings wrote: > a HTTP based API to update DNS records similar to the system at > dyndns.org. Be pleased to get peoples thoughts Interesting. I've implemented a simple dyndns update client, the main trick is to get this right in hardware, and then stick to it for some *decades* (sic!). Discuss it also with the dyndns folks. In the record parameters I miss MX and SPF among others. I'm not sure about "MUST https", how about SHOULD ? Dyndns allows more than one "host". You have that as domain, clearly you don't want to limit it to hosts, but allowing more than one might be good. In the examples ITYM one "?" to start the query part with the 1st name=value pair, but later the conventional separator is "&", not "?". Apart from 0 and -1, do those indices actually work with DNS ? What a client sees as second record might not be the second record in a RR set from a server's POV. Example 4.2 actually defines two MX records, it doesn't "update" them. If the index is supposed to be either -1, 0, or n+1 (for n existing records) this might work. But then index=1 has the same effect as index=0, and n+1 has the same effect as index=-1, so something is still odd with those indices. How about s/index/action/ and: action=0 kill all, optionally create new first action=1 keep all, add new record If action=1 matches an existing record it's a noop, no harm done. A very interesting part in the dyndns protocol is that clients MUST NOT update anything unless it has changed. They go as far as demanding to maintain persistent state (surviving a reboot). They also allow to omit the IP, taking the IP of the query as default (when update clients cannot figure out what the public IP is). Frank _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 7 22:26:52 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC1E23A681B; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:26:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C148F3A681B for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:26:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.562 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.562 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.038, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o2UqvkZLc7NI for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:26:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com (sj-iport-1.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE6163A67E1 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:26:50 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.30,321,1212364800"; d="scan'208";a="49909307" Received: from sj-dkim-1.cisco.com ([171.71.179.21]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jul 2008 05:26:58 +0000 Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m685Qw2l011195; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:26:58 -0700 Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.194]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m685QuX1008927; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 05:26:57 GMT From: "Dan Wing" To: "'Cullen Jennings'" , References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com> <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> Subject: RE: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:26:56 -0700 Message-ID: <02c801c8e0bb$3de71640$c2f0200a@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 In-Reply-To: <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> thread-index: Acjgb6obVTegvHPcQMu+SVOQji9UawAS2bnQ DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1822; t=1215494818; x=1216358818; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim1004; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=dwing@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Dan=20Wing=22=20 |Subject:=20RE=3A=20draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 |Sender:=20; bh=mgvSwpawZ6m3ByKdwYNOK+ZMUftgKkqkZ67st+5MZEI=; b=NGAZ5wJjAzsuiEyq9ZXAS+WL+hwdUu5Ea6Qsc3eBZhiOquBHt/p4rnA2ns a7B2Z1IcZiLb49ZflCW1jQrQbQztYvNhQysU2zGnwXdXvHZUW2J0dAvCGL+F qXZDKJzjGeHF8vztMbV9g+TZ0YkZygjxR7peziddkGlWZ4YDvtaws=; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-1; header.From=dwing@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim1004 verified; ); X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org > -----Original Message----- > From: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cullen Jennings > Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2008 9:12 PM > To: apps-discuss@ietf.org > Subject: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 > > > The draft proposes a HTTP based API to update DNS records similar to > the system at dyndns.org. Be pleased to get peoples thoughts but I'm > going to be slow responding due until after the Dublin meeting. It seems the GET method is inappropriate because you're causing a side-effect (updating of the DNS), . -d > Thanks, Cullen > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org > > Date: July 6, 2008 7:45:01 PM PDT (CA) > > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > Subject: I-D Action:draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00.txt > > Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > > directories. > > > > Title : HTTP API for Updating DNS Records > > Author(s) : C. Jennings > > Filename : draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00.txt > > Pages : 9 > > Date : 2008-07-06 > > > > This specification defines a simple HTTP based scheme for clients to > > update DNS records. > > > > The draft is being discussed on the apps-discuss@ietf.org list. > > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jennings-app-dns-upd > ate-00.txt > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > > Internet-Draft. > _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 7 22:59:32 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2889F3A69D1; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:59:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAD5C28C0EA for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:59:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.149 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V0SeosyvBnPU for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:59:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from office.denic.de (gw-office.denic.de [81.91.160.182]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 034F43A69D1 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:59:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from x27.adm.denic.de ([10.122.64.128]) by office.denic.de with esmtp id 1KG6Ee-0008Gf-Hz; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 07:59:32 +0200 Received: from localhost by x27.adm.denic.de with local id 1KG6Dc-0001me-Gz; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 07:58:28 +0200 Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 07:58:28 +0200 From: Peter Koch To: Cullen Jennings Subject: Re: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 Message-ID: <20080708055828.GA6547@x27.adm.denic.de> References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com> <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 09:12:24PM -0700, Cullen Jennings wrote: > > The draft proposes a HTTP based API to update DNS records similar to > the system at dyndns.org. Be pleased to get peoples thoughts but I'm a cursory review raises these questions from a DNS protocol and operational perspective: 1) We do have Dynamic Updates and EPP as "provisioning" protocols. Which deficiencies is this approach trying to address in particular? 2) The list of RR types is pretty arbitrary. Some RR type independence in the spirit of RFC 3597 would be urgently needed, making error "501" not occur. 3) How is the SOA serial increment initiated? 4) Interaction with DNSSEC needs to be described 5) What kind of intra-RRSet ordering is assumed in section 3? 6) Why would a user be allowed to add/modify/delete arbitrary RRSets? NITS: o SRV RRs require domain names as targets , not IP addresses o The reference to RFC 1464 ngling - which is OK, since 1464 has no practical relevance o The draft is aiming at Standards Track, but references the Experimental RFC 5205 in a way that should be normative -Peter _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 7 23:34:35 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 304853A6841; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 23:34:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D636F3A6841 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 23:34:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.471 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.471 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.874, BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=3.196, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X+FZUkiU8dZV for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 23:34:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B9CF3A67E5 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 23:34:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KG6md-0007ji-4G for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 06:34:39 +0000 Received: from rain.gmane.org ([80.91.229.7]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 06:34:39 +0000 Received: from hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz by rain.gmane.org with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 06:34:39 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: apps-discuss@ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" Subject: Re: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 08:36:58 +0200 Organization: Lines: 9 Message-ID: References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com><89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> <02c801c8e0bb$3de71640$c2f0200a@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: rain.gmane.org X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1914 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Dan Wing wrote: > It seems the GET method is inappropriate because > you're causing a side-effect (updating of the DNS) This needs some words about caching, doesn't it ? I forgot that when I asked why it has "MUST https". Frank _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 8 00:49:50 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87BE23A69ED; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 00:49:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CCDA3A69ED for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 00:49:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.771 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.771 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, WHOIS_DMNBYPROXY=0.478] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZnW1TsuFX13Q for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 00:49:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.nic.fr (mx2.nic.fr [192.134.4.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 795423A69C2 for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 00:49:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 8D6AF1C011D; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:49:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay1.nic.fr (relay1.nic.fr [192.134.4.162]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 887BE1C00D8; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:49:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay1.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CE31A1DAD5; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:49:51 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:49:51 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Cullen Jennings Subject: Re: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 Message-ID: <20080708074951.GA31856@nic.fr> References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com> <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux lenny/sid X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.24-1-686 i686 Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 09:12:24PM -0700, Cullen Jennings wrote a message of 85 lines which said: > The draft proposes a HTTP based API to update DNS records similar to the > system at dyndns.org. This is yet another "DNS modification" API. You may also consider ".tel": http://www.telnic.net/developers-landing2.html And others such as Slicehost: http://articles.slicehost.com/2008/5/13/slicemanager-api-documentation _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 8 09:41:39 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5242028C148; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:41:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59ABD28C148 for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:41:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7DGS7yAGwczh for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:41:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from yx-out-2324.google.com (yx-out-2324.google.com [74.125.44.30]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D1E53A6810 for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:41:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by yx-out-2324.google.com with SMTP id 8so559562yxg.49 for ; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 09:41:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.110.1 with SMTP id i1mr8083343wac.112.1215535304678; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 09:41:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.115.60.5 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:41:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 12:41:44 -0400 From: "Mark Baker" To: "Dan Wing" Subject: Re: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 In-Reply-To: <02c801c8e0bb$3de71640$c2f0200a@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com> <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> <02c801c8e0bb$3de71640$c2f0200a@cisco.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: fcb525624b5cd92a Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 1:26 AM, Dan Wing wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org >> [mailto:apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cullen Jennings >> Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2008 9:12 PM >> To: apps-discuss@ietf.org >> Subject: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 >> >> >> The draft proposes a HTTP based API to update DNS records similar to >> the system at dyndns.org. Be pleased to get peoples thoughts but I'm >> going to be slow responding due until after the Dublin meeting. > > It seems the GET method is inappropriate because you're causing a side-effect > (updating of the DNS), . Yes, most definitely. GET should be used when you want to retrieve records, not change them. PUT seems the right method to use for updating existing records, while POST seems appropriate for adding new records. Kudos for not running out and inventing a whole new DNS-specific update protocol though. Mark. -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies http://www.coactus.com _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 8 09:47:36 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 054743A6982; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:47:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2203B3A6982 for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:47:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.13 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.13 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.119, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VXs2ZUB3YhVR for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:47:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.nic.fr (mx2.nic.fr [192.134.4.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41E8B3A68FA for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:47:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id F37C81C010F; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:47:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED9D81C00FD; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:47:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E106458ECCA; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:47:34 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:47:34 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Mark Baker Subject: Re: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 Message-ID: <20080708164734.GA31957@nic.fr> References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com> <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> <02c801c8e0bb$3de71640$c2f0200a@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux lenny/sid X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.24-1-686 i686 Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 12:41:44PM -0400, Mark Baker wrote a message of 34 lines which said: > PUT seems the right method to use for updating existing records, > while POST seems appropriate for adding new records. That's not what RFC 2616 says. The fundamental difference between the POST and PUT requests is reflected in the different meaning of the Request-URI. The URI in a POST request identifies the resource that will handle the enclosed entity. _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 8 10:00:20 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6068D3A6AA5; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 10:00:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15E0B3A6810 for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 10:00:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wMzllyX7Z7dL for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 10:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from yx-out-2324.google.com (yx-out-2324.google.com [74.125.44.28]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99C413A6909 for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 10:00:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by yx-out-2324.google.com with SMTP id 8so562808yxg.49 for ; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 10:00:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.145.18 with SMTP id s18mr8159646wad.26.1215536425241; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 10:00:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.115.60.5 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 10:00:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 13:00:25 -0400 From: "Mark Baker" To: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" Subject: Re: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 In-Reply-To: <20080708164734.GA31957@nic.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com> <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> <02c801c8e0bb$3de71640$c2f0200a@cisco.com> <20080708164734.GA31957@nic.fr> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 8eae878e850d093e Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 12:47 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 12:41:44PM -0400, > Mark Baker wrote > a message of 34 lines which said: > >> PUT seems the right method to use for updating existing records, >> while POST seems appropriate for adding new records. > > That's not what RFC 2616 says. > > The fundamental difference between the POST and PUT requests is > reflected in the different meaning of the Request-URI. The URI in a > POST request identifies the resource that will handle the enclosed > entity. I don't see how that contradicts what I said. Mark. -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies http://www.coactus.com _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jul 9 01:20:02 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 707383A6A51; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 01:20:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E365228B797 for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 01:20:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.949 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MHLYX0TzBh3y for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 01:20:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from frobbit.se (klara.frobbit.se [85.30.129.37]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDFDC3A6A51 for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 01:19:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [85.30.128.225] (account paf HELO [192.168.1.194]) by frobbit.se (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.10) with ESMTPA id 6940636; Wed, 09 Jul 2008 10:20:09 +0200 Message-Id: From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: Peter Koch In-Reply-To: <20080708055828.GA6547@x27.adm.denic.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926) Subject: Re: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 10:19:52 +0200 References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com> <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> <20080708055828.GA6547@x27.adm.denic.de> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926) Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org On 8 jul 2008, at 07.58, Peter Koch wrote: > On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 09:12:24PM -0700, Cullen Jennings wrote: >> >> The draft proposes a HTTP based API to update DNS records similar to >> the system at dyndns.org. Be pleased to get peoples thoughts but I'm > > a cursory review raises these questions from a DNS protocol and > operational > perspective: > > 1) We do have Dynamic Updates and EPP as "provisioning" protocols. > Which deficiencies is this approach trying to address in particular? Specifically I see need for explicit text on why Dynamic Updates is "not good enough". Patrik > 2) The list of RR types is pretty arbitrary. Some RR type > independence in > the spirit of RFC 3597 would be urgently needed, making error "501" > not occur. > > 3) How is the SOA serial increment initiated? > > 4) Interaction with DNSSEC needs to be described > > 5) What kind of intra-RRSet ordering is assumed in section 3? > > 6) Why would a user be allowed to add/modify/delete arbitrary RRSets? > > NITS: > o SRV RRs require domain names as targets , not IP addresses > o The reference to RFC 1464 ngling - which is OK, since 1464 has no > practical relevance > o The draft is aiming at Standards Track, but references the > Experimental > RFC 5205 in a way that should be normative > > -Peter > _______________________________________________ > Apps-Discuss mailing list > Apps-Discuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jul 9 03:18:31 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C28B63A6A6F; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 03:18:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97C113A6A6F for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 03:18:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Evrao-cm+CbD for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 03:18:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from diotima.switch.ch (diotima.switch.ch [IPv6:2001:620:0:4:203:baff:fe4c:d751]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56BA43A6A5E for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 03:18:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from diotima.switch.ch (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by diotima.switch.ch (8.14.2+Sun/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m69AIVHp018466 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 9 Jul 2008 12:18:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from leinen@localhost) by diotima.switch.ch (8.14.2+Sun/8.14.2/Submit) id m69AIUv2018465; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 12:18:30 +0200 (CEST) X-Authentication-Warning: diotima.switch.ch: leinen set sender to simon.leinen@switch.ch using -f From: Simon Leinen To: "Mark Baker" Subject: Re: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 In-Reply-To: (Mark Baker's message of "Tue, 8 Jul 2008 12:41:44 -0400") References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com> <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> <02c801c8e0bb$3de71640$c2f0200a@cisco.com> X-Face: 1Nk*r=:$IBBb8|TyRB'2WSY6u:BzMO7N)#id#-4_}MsU5?vTI?dez|JiutW4sKBLjp.l7, F 7QOld^hORRtpCUj)!cP]gtK_SyK5FW(+o"!or:v^C^]OxX^3+IPd\z, @ttmwYVO7l`6OXXYR` Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2008 12:18:30 +0200 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.2 (usg-unix-v) MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mark Baker writes: > Kudos for not running out and inventing a whole new DNS-specific > update protocol though. That would have been "REinventing" - see RFC 2136, "Dynamic Updates in the Domain Name System", P. Vixie (Ed.), April 1997. -- Simon. _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 10 08:42:08 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25E883A6818; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:42:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 327E73A6B3F for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 17:54:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SWU7GTQsUFcM for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 17:54:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-3.cisco.com (sj-iport-3.cisco.com [171.71.176.72]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8774A3A6A7E for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 17:54:19 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.30,327,1212364800"; d="scan'208";a="85916408" Received: from sj-dkim-4.cisco.com ([171.71.179.196]) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Jul 2008 00:54:30 +0000 Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (sj-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.177.237]) by sj-dkim-4.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m690sUwq002623; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 17:54:30 -0700 Received: from [10.0.1.195] (sjc-vpn6-2040.cisco.com [10.21.127.248]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m690qfMj025223; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 00:54:29 GMT Message-Id: <8CC8C25C-1F40-49F1-89CC-FF00A2D15136@cisco.com> From: Cullen Jennings To: Dan Wing (dwing) In-Reply-To: <02c801c8e0bb$3de71640$c2f0200a@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926) Subject: Re: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 17:56:44 -0700 References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com> <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> <02c801c8e0bb$3de71640$c2f0200a@cisco.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=796; t=1215564870; x=1216428870; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim4002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=fluffy@cisco.com; z=From:=20Cullen=20Jennings=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 |Sender:=20; bh=qGVNRVqbLRRf+xKtE5LmnWk7oikuzC2DgR6tq1dya78=; b=DjABwuZXA5igFhU28peqKGoGSR5NbzDDTqK6uhTMm8YrD7LZCI6mCkW3aB 8wUgy3OppC8kHmi0yyc4ValynHbOZ89ZVz6xq9Owtm8zCpQA3aBoXUOlVDgF vHEV1raogk; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=fluffy@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim4002 verified; ); X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:42:07 -0700 Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org On Jul 7, 2008, at 10:26 PM, Dan Wing (dwing) wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org > > [mailto:apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cullen Jennings > > Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2008 9:12 PM > > To: apps-discuss@ietf.org > > Subject: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 > > > > > > The draft proposes a HTTP based API to update DNS records similar to > > the system at dyndns.org. Be pleased to get peoples thoughts but I'm > > going to be slow responding due until after the Dublin meeting. > > It seems the GET method is inappropriate because you're causing a > side-effect > (updating of the DNS), >. > > -d Yep, agree - a few people have pointed this out to me. _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 10 08:42:08 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 621F23A68AB; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:42:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3854A3A67EC for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:27:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.539 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.539 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.060, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SsYDeO7SzHbM for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:27:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com (sj-iport-1.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B75293A67DF for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:27:37 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.30,327,1212364800"; d="scan'208";a="50438012" Received: from sj-dkim-1.cisco.com ([171.71.179.21]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Jul 2008 01:27:48 +0000 Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m691Rmf1015854; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:27:48 -0700 Received: from [10.0.1.195] (sjc-vpn6-2040.cisco.com [10.21.127.248]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m691RlmP007406; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 01:27:48 GMT Message-Id: <26C42831-8209-4CF0-9101-F4DB97428EFA@cisco.com> From: Cullen Jennings To: Peter Koch In-Reply-To: <20080708055828.GA6547@x27.adm.denic.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926) Subject: Re: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:30:01 -0700 References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com> <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> <20080708055828.GA6547@x27.adm.denic.de> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2860; t=1215566868; x=1216430868; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim1004; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=fluffy@cisco.com; z=From:=20Cullen=20Jennings=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 |Sender:=20; bh=oHS/RxVYDOIOo/3YFhXTIkXZuL5EDOEVb19DiC/FghM=; b=U1UtclJCo0jKoxVAYbrcnxtfuMwZOZNU5xOUdDgcU87EKzYnLbbI+iQf84 YLJA0CL9PFI+M1IVDEDn9M6uKqbWuxyrgTkADJYfp4DLkgrBMq9EStS9dmxp E1qU+RqTL5HjRdA5YWwtxf5y6ctjIUSqNlYv6y4WEwc1WhFT7FN84=; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-1; header.From=fluffy@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim1004 verified; ); X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:42:07 -0700 Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Peter - many thanks - appreciate your comments and would like to talk to you more about this On Jul 7, 2008, at 10:58 PM, Peter Koch wrote: > On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 09:12:24PM -0700, Cullen Jennings wrote: > > > > The draft proposes a HTTP based API to update DNS records similar to > > the system at dyndns.org. Be pleased to get peoples thoughts but I'm > > a cursory review raises these questions from a DNS protocol and > operational > perspective: > > 1) We do have Dynamic Updates and EPP as "provisioning" protocols. > Which deficiencies is this approach trying to address in > particular? > Clearly this is the fundamental question in trying to decide what to do with this draft. This approach is very simplistic with less features than other but approaches. However, an simple HTTP approach seems to be one that an is gaining a fair amount of adoption in actual deployments. > > > 2) The list of RR types is pretty arbitrary. Some RR type > independence in > the spirit of RFC 3597 would be urgently needed, making error "501" > not occur. > I can easily imagine a parameter with the record type and a second parameter with the value. Interesting the implementors of the servers don't seem to be keen on that - hard to tell why but some part of it is they don't want to negotiate capabilities. No matter what happened, saying all record types need to be supported is very unlikely to be implemented and at the same time the draft needs to define some minimum set needs to specified. > > > 3) How is the SOA serial increment initiated? > I was sort of hoping the draft did not have to get into this. Ideas on what you think is needed? > > > 4) Interaction with DNSSEC needs to be described > Not sure what to say. If the records are signed or not seem somewhat separable topic than this. > > > 5) What kind of intra-RRSet ordering is assumed in section 3? > good point - I suspect that there should be no assumptions about the order used here and what might actually end up in DNS > > > 6) Why would a user be allowed to add/modify/delete arbitrary RRSets? > The whole security model is very simplistic, a given user is authorized (or not authorized) to update anything in a domain. Suggestions? > > > NITS: > o SRV RRs require domain names as targets , not IP addresses > oops > > o The reference to RFC 1464 ngling - which is OK, since 1464 has no > practical relevance > o The draft is aiming at Standards Track, but references the > Experimental > RFC 5205 in a way that should be normative > hmm - probably not real important one way or the other but why do you think this should be a normative reference? I'm just passing a string which happens to cary some data that > > > -Peter _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 10 08:42:08 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93BB03A6960; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:42:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 393B63A68AF for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:38:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.544 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.544 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.055, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RuVHdOaPvEFA for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:38:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F4743A6879 for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:38:23 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.30,328,1212364800"; d="scan'208";a="124173597" Received: from sj-dkim-1.cisco.com ([171.71.179.21]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Jul 2008 01:38:33 +0000 Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (sj-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.177.237]) by sj-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m691cYCW029720; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:38:34 -0700 Received: from [10.0.1.195] (sjc-vpn6-2040.cisco.com [10.21.127.248]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m691cXWR004691; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 01:38:33 GMT Message-Id: <75B040D5-F5E8-493F-A191-D36EEF3AFD53@cisco.com> From: Cullen Jennings To: Cyrus Daboo In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926) Subject: Re: draft-jennings-http-srv-00 Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:40:47 -0700 References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1678; t=1215567514; x=1216431514; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim1004; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=fluffy@cisco.com; z=From:=20Cullen=20Jennings=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20draft-jennings-http-srv-00 |Sender:=20; bh=Ir8/99QR8wgZrn1FCbw8lpjiKo139rrscCZzo19ap4o=; b=OlDUWdtcZlQGDu9RZAYQ3WTp8UNCDQt4tvAGR9XYVeeqV7Pyt4cvLMAmXy pP0yk/9fmSw6eyi0L1JJkpXWL9Gy77y87Vf+zY4gLGw39tRtruNaVcBmGoRx OgT8wXXJ2nTDr2ghbpvOd8Ut288yZVJIskpjT5nerIimrxpSoIFFM=; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-1; header.From=fluffy@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim1004 verified; ); X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:42:07 -0700 Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org thanks - I did not realize how caldav was doing this. On Jul 7, 2008, at 6:50 AM, Cyrus Daboo wrote: > Hi, > Just saw this posted: >. I am in the process of defining SRV record lookups for CalDAV and > CardDAV as well. > > The HTTP SRV draft proposes both an 'http' and an 'https' service > type. However, comments here: ServiceTypes.html> for the https service suggest that 'https' should > not be used. Hmm - I don't see how the security would work on the redirect approach. If one started wanting a HTTPS connection to foo.com, found a _http SRV for foo.com, connected to it, then got a redirect to bar.com, then when you do a TLS to bar.com, does the cert need to match foo.com or bar.com. Anyways, the redirect seem unnecessary, I sort of lean to do it the same way SIP does but agree we need to sort this out and do it a common way. > > > What do people think? Should there be a separate 'https' SRV service > type? If so, then should I define both 'caldav'/'caldavs' and > 'carddav'/'carddavs', or instead just rely on the http redirect > approach with a single service type? Or perhaps, 'caldav' and > 'carddav' should be specified in terms of the http service, e.g. > 'caldav.http' and 'caldav.https'. > > Also, why isn't there an IANA registry of SRV service types? yep, I agree, I tried to work on this a long time ago and the pain threshold was too high but I think some folks might be slowly getting to it. > The port numbers registry is not sufficient. > > > -- > Cyrus Daboo > _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 10 08:42:08 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3FAE3A69B5; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:42:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB5343A6810 for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:48:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.549 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nFFajrJmEGqR for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:48:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com (sj-iport-4.cisco.com [171.68.10.86]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECC9C3A65A6 for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:48:32 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.30,328,1212364800"; d="scan'208";a="17517816" Received: from sj-dkim-2.cisco.com ([171.71.179.186]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Jul 2008 01:48:41 +0000 Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m691mf30030830 for ; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:48:41 -0700 Received: from [10.0.1.195] (sjc-vpn6-2040.cisco.com [10.21.127.248]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m691mfnu024138 for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 01:48:41 GMT Message-Id: <15DA5061-CCC6-4FB0-B63F-8577A1BA95F5@cisco.com> From: Cullen Jennings To: apps-discuss@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926) Subject: question about moderation of this list Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:50:55 -0700 References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=892; t=1215568121; x=1216432121; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim2002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=fluffy@cisco.com; z=From:=20Cullen=20Jennings=20 |Subject:=20question=20about=20moderation=20of=20this=20lis t |Sender:=20; bh=ZAyYrtRqAyXfO2fWgiC5SSz4IirabhW37p/1RmY3VPs=; b=I45+5l1K7JbyPZ+cHaI2+rGjHawSqsDQ1bN6HTXA8xSix1gK87H0ojbwU4 E2jstWcA5KVCvZ/0Yq1bBOgKEkb9fARsZJyFnKY3QuRNDMJO4UmQbftj/nsD wjfPzq4Z15; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-2; header.From=fluffy@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim2002 verified; ); X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:42:07 -0700 X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org I am subscribed to this list (just checked) but all my posts seem to be moderated. What is the moderation policy of this list. Thanks, Cullen Begin forwarded message: > From: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org > Date: July 8, 2008 6:27:40 PM PDT (CA) > To: fluffy@cisco.com > Subject: Your message to Apps-Discuss awaits moderator approval > > Your mail to 'Apps-Discuss' with the subject > > Re: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 > > Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval. > > The reason it is being held: > > Post to moderated list > > Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive > notification of the moderator's decision. If you would like to cancel > this posting, please visit the following URL: > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/confirm/apps-discuss/d36cd7187f992cb257fa6b05861f0bdf788979af > _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 10 08:47:54 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 816163A69FB; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:47:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6691B3A687D for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:47:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mh0vsUuN7QHd for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:47:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dizzyd.com (dizzyd.com [207.210.219.225]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAAFF3A68D5 for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:47:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wrk225.corp.jabber.com (dencfw1.jabber.com [207.182.164.5]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by dizzyd.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 834F54039B; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 09:45:36 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <48762F2B.908@stpeter.im> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 09:47:55 -0600 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.8.1.14) Gecko/20080421 Thunderbird/2.0.0.14 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Cullen Jennings Subject: Re: draft-jennings-http-srv-00 References: <75B040D5-F5E8-493F-A191-D36EEF3AFD53@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <75B040D5-F5E8-493F-A191-D36EEF3AFD53@cisco.com> Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0211713877==" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --===============0211713877== Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms020200040801080200060508" This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms020200040801080200060508 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cullen Jennings wrote: > > thanks - I did not realize how caldav was doing this. > > On Jul 7, 2008, at 6:50 AM, Cyrus Daboo wrote: > >> Hi, >> Just saw this posted: >> . >> I am in the process of defining SRV record lookups for CalDAV and >> CardDAV as well. >> >> The HTTP SRV draft proposes both an 'http' and an 'https' service >> type. However, comments here: >> for the https service >> suggest that 'https' should not be used. > > Hmm - I don't see how the security would work on the redirect approach. > If one started wanting a HTTPS connection to foo.com, found a _http SRV > for foo.com, connected to it, then got a redirect to bar.com, then when > you do a TLS to bar.com, does the cert need to match foo.com or bar.com. Would RFC 4985 help here? Peter --------------ms020200040801080200060508 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIYQDCC B3AwggbZoAMCAQICAQowDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEEBQAwgbAxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMQ8wDQYDVQQI EwZJc3JhZWwxDjAMBgNVBAcTBUVpbGF0MRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMRowGAYD VQQLExFDQSBBdXRob3JpdHkgRGVwLjEpMCcGA1UEAxMgRnJlZSBTU0wgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlv biBBdXRob3JpdHkxITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZzAeFw0wNTA0 MDUxNDUyMTNaFw0xMDA0MDQxNDUyMTNaMIGvMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEPMA0GA1UECBMGSXNy YWVsMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSMwIQYDVQQLExpTZWN1cmUgQ2VydGlmaWNh dGUgU2lnbmluZzEvMC0GA1UEAxMmU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMyBQcmltYXJ5IEVtYWlsIEZy ZWUgQ0ExITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZzCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAPEaOcSx5ZNexwo1zJNcX48UV0UtkNtWX3qa9ZaX2VZilgIz eIrObloQV0Ma2rdgqosW9xMb5u3lBVIumt7fEwgMqqtDa3F2Qudelv93P9z2nbmn7X4GnCKA IQcW97KOSgQQHaVPHq03xGFbszx+LOKrBi/xv3bcGxtYrH+10M1nHbCRo8U2+zcJQowxoI+O U5nhko9vU25Jp8ZQ2fROH6C2TSjZuanzMTyvc5+dJiN2Hm2MhAMrqO7pUGhDKuUvnmKpAcwj eYQHU51mvlB4IId+4bTEwVoG4AMJ8RXB47VdJevN0yqeJSACyoRft4w4OpqFysR1HTT6aE6u xLg9ZC0CAwEAAaOCBBMwggQPMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wCwYDVR0PBAQDAgHmMB0GA1Ud DgQWBBQErNskd1NGRpZfFwFcfUJHvUgZCDCB3QYDVR0jBIHVMIHSgBQcicOWzL3+MtUNjIEx tpidjShkjaGBtqSBszCBsDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEOMAwGA1UE BxMFRWlsYXQxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xGjAYBgNVBAsTEUNBIEF1dGhvcml0 eSBEZXAuMSkwJwYDVQQDEyBGcmVlIFNTTCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIEF1dGhvcml0eTEhMB8G CSqGSIb3DQEJARYSYWRtaW5Ac3RhcnRjb20ub3JnggEAMB0GA1UdEQQWMBSBEmFkbWluQHN0 YXJ0Y29tLm9yZzAdBgNVHRIEFjAUgRJhZG1pbkBzdGFydGNvbS5vcmcwYgYDVR0fBFswWTAp oCegJYYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2NhLWNybC5jcmwwLKAqoCiGJmh0dHA6 Ly9jcmwuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2NybC9jYS1jcmwuY3JsMIIBSgYDVR0gBIIBQTCCAT0wggE5 BgsrBgEEAYG1NwEBATCCASgwLwYIKwYBBQUHAgEWI2h0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9y Zy9wb2xpY3kucGRmMDUGCCsGAQUFBwIBFilodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvaW50 ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjCBvQYIKwYBBQUHAgIwgbAwFBYNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjADAgEBGoGX TGltaXRlZCBMaWFiaWxpdHksIHJlYWQgdGhlIHNlY3Rpb24gKkxlZ2FsIExpbWl0YXRpb25z KiBvZiB0aGUgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkgUG9saWN5IGF2YWls YWJsZSBhdCBodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9saWN5LnBkZjARBglghkgBhvhC AQEEBAMCAAcwUAYJYIZIAYb4QgENBEMWQVN0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRl cm1lZGlhdGUgRnJlZSBTU0wgRW1haWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGVzMDIGCWCGSAGG+EIBBAQlFiNo dHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvY2EtY3JsLmNybDAzBglghkgBhvhCAQMEJhYkaHR0 cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2NydC1jcmwuY3JsMDIGCWCGSAGG+EIBCAQlFiNodHRw Oi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9saWN5LnBkZjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQQFAAOBgQBc1g6H yT3ZrGb0Kq+kkqetnSXtcwffHEr6Tia2XqCqPLLzdZ8VTxVjeq/Kpg2u+8cGASIl1U45XmWa v4Vez+jSSnChRHwidmbwjCtNBFxr4C/Nkgs8wk2zNQbh+zlDKNophJT7+DVOhnIMJzdNkQW0 4STurMCFwLoyx5k1rDHQYTCCCGIwggdKoAMCAQICAwF4qjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADCBrzEL MAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjEj MCEGA1UECxMaU2VjdXJlIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxLzAtBgNVBAMTJlN0YXJ0Q29t IENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBFbWFpbCBGcmVlIENBMSEwHwYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhJhZG1pbkBz dGFydGNvbS5vcmcwHhcNMDcwODIyMjExMzI3WhcNMDgwODIxMjExMzI3WjCBujELMAkGA1UE BhMCVVMxETAPBgNVBAgTCENvbG9yYWRvMQ8wDQYDVQQHEwZEZW52ZXIxGjAYBgNVBAoTEVBl dGVyIFNhaW50LUFuZHJlMSwwKgYDVQQLEyNTdGFydENvbSBUcnVzdGVkIENlcnRpZmljYXRl IE1lbWJlcjEaMBgGA1UEAxMRUGV0ZXIgU2FpbnQtQW5kcmUxITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEnN0 cGV0ZXJAc3RwZXRlci5pbTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBALC1dkqD gghuvUCkEloRDX50TTJ6Szj1BqtMpYq+An66BwkWfP07uay+jHori77776wk1/Ajk1nTSHX+ JWo+JWwVXYWBX+Zd780bB0FGShYlHGwMhd/pxX9sT4KW3D+r8sIHVbTGdudSweuNdBhqr1iE cjze75hpywMkk1OQhTkseQxI5owa9M31JOdNEX0Ja6esyhwwtqqTNC86OujXwa2wew8GTRJE 9p2I0B1VCsKuJaPatbIcf9OFiTSODb5vyoq3+lrElh6V6BXKxEfQ4D2HCSY+5UmlKdnltzvN bqxyaTYQi1YGsFzew7ST3R8P5jrCq2cvRjGrTKVojZXgPZ0CAwEAAaOCBHgwggR0MAwGA1Ud EwQFMAMCAQAwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgSwMB0GA1UdJQQWMBQGCCsGAQUFBwMCBggrBgEFBQcDBDAd BgNVHQ4EFgQUl7CU2dS/alOwLIHV/Oc2RkGDYugwgd0GA1UdIwSB1TCB0oAUBKzbJHdTRkaW XxcBXH1CR71IGQihgbakgbMwgbAxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMQ8wDQYDVQQIEwZJc3JhZWwxDjAM BgNVBAcTBUVpbGF0MRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMRowGAYDVQQLExFDQSBBdXRo b3JpdHkgRGVwLjEpMCcGA1UEAxMgRnJlZSBTU0wgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkx ITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZ4IBCjCCAUAGA1UdIASCATcwggEz MIIBLwYLKwYBBAGBtTcBAQQwggEeMDUGCCsGAQUFBwIBFilodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNv bS5vcmcvaW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjAvBggrBgEFBQcCARYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRj b20ub3JnL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwgbMGCCsGAQUFBwICMIGmMBQWDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4wAwIB ARqBjUxpbWl0ZWQgTGlhYmlsaXR5LCByZWFkIHRoZSBzZWN0aW9uICpMZWdhbCBMaW1pdGF0 aW9ucyogb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gUG9saWN5IGF2YWlsYWJsZSBh dCBodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9saWN5LnBkZjBkBgNVHR8EXTBbMCygKqAo hiZodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvY3J0dTMtY3JsLmNybDAroCmgJ4YlaHR0cDov L2NybC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvY3J0dTMtY3JsLmNybDCBhAYIKwYBBQUHAQEEeDB2MDcGCCsG AQUFBzABhitodHRwOi8vb2NzcC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvc3ViL2NsYXNzMy91c2VyL2NhMDsG CCsGAQUFBzAChi9odHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvc3ViLmNsYXNzMy51c2VyLmNh LmNydDARBglghkgBhvhCAQEEBAMCBaAwMQYJYIZIAYb4QgENBCQWIlN0YXJ0Q29tIFRydXN0 ZWQgRW1haWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUwMgYJYIZIAYb4QgEEBCUWI2h0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0 Y29tLm9yZy9jYS1jcmwuY3JsMDUGCWCGSAGG+EIBAwQoFiZodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNv bS5vcmcvY3J0dTMtY3JsLmNybDAyBglghkgBhvhCAQgEJRYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRj b20ub3JnL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwIwYDVR0SBBwwGoYYaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3Jn MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQCdG1L0T4OT1x4X/cKsuHxgijRaZGGiVECcn5+1X7E3H54/ yDkUqWAp6MZ3hZm36pzTYYnl+5M6vldLcqFCVpD7MgH6Kmu+r6pXAjU33k1RIHnkBvQ6KGlR p0RjfaZW/2MkG07vF2QTLbx6KIhi0pa9Bg9wlqyw+C2g6FYnfmrdJLgGrxUXek8DSZNjZ/AA 75OoutrWkBtdaL2TbFiawdbGuJbSoQLHqLrNhT8f74Oec7ReOmuUTEL8hsFU0sbY/n2e9Wna 1Vzze3nZPbyPiC5F88p88gVLB9mKkOzleYefYiQw8LABz5x1MI+w0bNKNPLviJ/KnHGFEfVL z1oMHyC3MIIIYjCCB0qgAwIBAgIDAXiqMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMIGvMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJ TDEPMA0GA1UECBMGSXNyYWVsMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSMwIQYDVQQLExpT ZWN1cmUgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzEvMC0GA1UEAxMmU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMyBQ cmltYXJ5IEVtYWlsIEZyZWUgQ0ExITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9y ZzAeFw0wNzA4MjIyMTEzMjdaFw0wODA4MjEyMTEzMjdaMIG6MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzERMA8G A1UECBMIQ29sb3JhZG8xDzANBgNVBAcTBkRlbnZlcjEaMBgGA1UEChMRUGV0ZXIgU2FpbnQt QW5kcmUxLDAqBgNVBAsTI1N0YXJ0Q29tIFRydXN0ZWQgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgTWVtYmVyMRow GAYDVQQDExFQZXRlciBTYWludC1BbmRyZTEhMB8GCSqGSIb3DQEJARYSc3RwZXRlckBzdHBl dGVyLmltMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAsLV2SoOCCG69QKQSWhEN fnRNMnpLOPUGq0ylir4CfroHCRZ8/Tu5rL6MeiuLvvvvrCTX8COTWdNIdf4laj4lbBVdhYFf 5l3vzRsHQUZKFiUcbAyF3+nFf2xPgpbcP6vywgdVtMZ251LB6410GGqvWIRyPN7vmGnLAyST U5CFOSx5DEjmjBr0zfUk500RfQlrp6zKHDC2qpM0Lzo66NfBrbB7DwZNEkT2nYjQHVUKwq4l o9q1shx/04WJNI4Nvm/Kirf6WsSWHpXoFcrER9DgPYcJJj7lSaUp2eW3O81urHJpNhCLVgaw XN7DtJPdHw/mOsKrZy9GMatMpWiNleA9nQIDAQABo4IEeDCCBHQwDAYDVR0TBAUwAwIBADAL BgNVHQ8EBAMCBLAwHQYDVR0lBBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwMEMB0GA1UdDgQWBBSX sJTZ1L9qU7AsgdX85zZGQYNi6DCB3QYDVR0jBIHVMIHSgBQErNskd1NGRpZfFwFcfUJHvUgZ CKGBtqSBszCBsDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEOMAwGA1UEBxMFRWls YXQxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xGjAYBgNVBAsTEUNBIEF1dGhvcml0eSBEZXAu MSkwJwYDVQQDEyBGcmVlIFNTTCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIEF1dGhvcml0eTEhMB8GCSqGSIb3 DQEJARYSYWRtaW5Ac3RhcnRjb20ub3JnggEKMIIBQAYDVR0gBIIBNzCCATMwggEvBgsrBgEE AYG1NwEBBDCCAR4wNQYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKWh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9pbnRl cm1lZGlhdGUucGRmMC8GCCsGAQUFBwIBFiNodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9s aWN5LnBkZjCBswYIKwYBBQUHAgIwgaYwFBYNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjADAgEBGoGNTGltaXRl ZCBMaWFiaWxpdHksIHJlYWQgdGhlIHNlY3Rpb24gKkxlZ2FsIExpbWl0YXRpb25zKiBvZiB0 aGUgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBQb2xpY3kgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGF0IGh0dHA6Ly9j ZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9wb2xpY3kucGRmMGQGA1UdHwRdMFswLKAqoCiGJmh0dHA6Ly9j ZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9jcnR1My1jcmwuY3JsMCugKaAnhiVodHRwOi8vY3JsLnN0YXJ0 Y29tLm9yZy9jcnR1My1jcmwuY3JsMIGEBggrBgEFBQcBAQR4MHYwNwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGK2h0 dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9zdWIvY2xhc3MzL3VzZXIvY2EwOwYIKwYBBQUHMAKG L2h0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9zdWIuY2xhc3MzLnVzZXIuY2EuY3J0MBEGCWCG SAGG+EIBAQQEAwIFoDAxBglghkgBhvhCAQ0EJBYiU3RhcnRDb20gVHJ1c3RlZCBFbWFpbCBD ZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZTAyBglghkgBhvhCAQQEJRYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2Nh LWNybC5jcmwwNQYJYIZIAYb4QgEDBCgWJmh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9jcnR1 My1jcmwuY3JsMDIGCWCGSAGG+EIBCAQlFiNodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9s aWN5LnBkZjAjBgNVHRIEHDAahhhodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEFBQADggEBAJ0bUvRPg5PXHhf9wqy4fGCKNFpkYaJUQJyfn7VfsTcfnj/IORSpYCnoxneF mbfqnNNhieX7kzq+V0tyoUJWkPsyAfoqa76vqlcCNTfeTVEgeeQG9DooaVGnRGN9plb/YyQb Tu8XZBMtvHooiGLSlr0GD3CWrLD4LaDoVid+at0kuAavFRd6TwNJk2Nn8ADvk6i62taQG11o vZNsWJrB1sa4ltKhAseous2FPx/vg55ztF46a5RMQvyGwVTSxtj+fZ71adrVXPN7edk9vI+I LkXzynzyBUsH2YqQ7OV5h59iJDDwsAHPnHUwj7DRs0o08u+In8qccYUR9UvPWgwfILcxggQs MIIEKAIBATCBtzCBrzELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEWMBQGA1UEChMN U3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjEjMCEGA1UECxMaU2VjdXJlIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxLzAt BgNVBAMTJlN0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBFbWFpbCBGcmVlIENBMSEwHwYJKoZI hvcNAQkBFhJhZG1pbkBzdGFydGNvbS5vcmcCAwF4qjAJBgUrDgMCGgUAoIICSTAYBgkqhkiG 9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0wODA3MTAxNTQ3NTVaMCMGCSqG SIb3DQEJBDEWBBQ48YO7OQLQeyiDPaGU/BU4HbAgsTBSBgkqhkiG9w0BCQ8xRTBDMAoGCCqG SIb3DQMHMA4GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgIAgDANBggqhkiG9w0DAgIBQDAHBgUrDgMCBzANBggqhkiG 9w0DAgIBKDCByAYJKwYBBAGCNxAEMYG6MIG3MIGvMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEPMA0GA1UECBMG SXNyYWVsMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSMwIQYDVQQLExpTZWN1cmUgQ2VydGlm aWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzEvMC0GA1UEAxMmU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMyBQcmltYXJ5IEVtYWls IEZyZWUgQ0ExITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZwIDAXiqMIHKBgsq hkiG9w0BCRACCzGBuqCBtzCBrzELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEWMBQG A1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjEjMCEGA1UECxMaU2VjdXJlIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25p bmcxLzAtBgNVBAMTJlN0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBFbWFpbCBGcmVlIENBMSEw HwYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhJhZG1pbkBzdGFydGNvbS5vcmcCAwF4qjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASC AQB/qaq2rjKCttwFde0f/x0yXCo4hCpOowE1dkeMp8XQLWo+5Oky5xe61vNxfQ+YPrUcxWCA 7Gj7ZEj1LRcB8wMUFXJNYxfmKeZGYU3gnFEOxSQ/XmxfTdCXfM9XzQOrEEsn0wTjw7W5dszu mkFHm3FAJ8v1wedwJBGvUtInRlzX8VqDgbhAXm8K1Zm5qQdasDwU9P0SlHqmOBVoQ2yDtPlQ seSToJTj1QSQkXvH2CBGbfKigdEaXmKjAORx3o3BXC2KaGdnh618vkUMGVTz0MsoBTcNkmyv xu2pbC/QtsdCeS2vMzhdo1UMdw/CPPEDQHAxV6YVIW9kwr/BcnbgC2ZSAAAAAAAA --------------ms020200040801080200060508-- --===============0211713877== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss --===============0211713877==-- From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 10 12:17:37 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF5BC3A69CD; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:17:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C63A33A6A7B for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:17:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VQgsaFRdOWJK for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:17:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx-out.forthnet.gr (mx-out.forthnet.gr [193.92.150.104]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 758743A69CD for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:17:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx-av-04.forthnet.gr (mx-av.forthnet.gr [193.92.150.27]) by mx-out-01.forthnet.gr (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id m6AJHnKJ008139; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:17:49 +0300 Received: from MX-IN-01.forthnet.gr (mx-in-01.forthnet.gr [193.92.150.23]) by mx-av-04.forthnet.gr (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id m6AJHnqr009843; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:17:49 +0300 Received: from hell.hell.gr (adsl62-214.lsf.forthnet.gr [79.103.189.214]) by MX-IN-01.forthnet.gr (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id m6AJHjXd025615; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:17:46 +0300 Authentication-Results: MX-IN-01.forthnet.gr smtp.mail=v13@v13.gr; spf=neutral Authentication-Results: MX-IN-01.forthnet.gr header.from=v13@v13.gr; sender-id=neutral From: Stefanos Harhalakis To: apps-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: draft-jennings-http-srv-00 Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:17:45 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 References: <75B040D5-F5E8-493F-A191-D36EEF3AFD53@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <75B040D5-F5E8-493F-A191-D36EEF3AFD53@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200807102217.45632.v13@v13.gr> X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org (Excuse me for the bad reply that will destroy threading but I've just subscribed to this list and I don't have the original message to reply to. If you don't see any problem ignore this comment). > The HTTP SRV draft proposes both an 'http' and an 'https' service > type. However, comments here: ServiceTypes.html> for the https service suggest that 'https' should > not be used. I've though this a bit and couldn't find any security flaw. I believe that there is no difference (regarding security) between A or CNAME records and SRV records. AFAICS https security will not be degraded. In fact, using a redirect method is a more serious security issue since forcing users to type http://www.mybank.org/ makes it easier to redirect them to https://www.notyourbank.com/ using a Mitm attack. The key point here is that users will be partially *forced* to initially type http instead of https (and probably bookmark this). This may also be true for any links that point to that site. _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Fri Jul 11 00:01:48 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F378A28C145; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:01:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA1E128C137 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:01:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.949 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J+Z1PaCeMa69 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:01:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from frobbit.se (klara.frobbit.se [85.30.129.37]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8BA328C14B for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:01:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [85.30.128.225] (account paf HELO [192.168.1.194]) by frobbit.se (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.10) with ESMTPA id 6960875; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:01:30 +0200 Message-Id: <3426B6B5-6C93-45FD-B5F9-4C193263EDED@frobbit.se> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: Cullen Jennings In-Reply-To: <26C42831-8209-4CF0-9101-F4DB97428EFA@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v928) Subject: Re: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:01:30 +0200 References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com> <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> <20080708055828.GA6547@x27.adm.denic.de> <26C42831-8209-4CF0-9101-F4DB97428EFA@cisco.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.928) Cc: Peter Koch , apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org On 9 jul 2008, at 03.30, Cullen Jennings wrote: >> 1) We do have Dynamic Updates and EPP as "provisioning" protocols. >> Which deficiencies is this approach trying to address in >> particular? > > Clearly this is the fundamental question in trying to decide what to > do with this draft. This approach is very simplistic with less > features than other but approaches. However, an simple HTTP approach > seems to be one that an is gaining a fair amount of adoption in > actual deployments. I would like to know more what you imply with "simple", and urge you to add that research in the draft. I.e. "why not use DNS dynamic update" section would make sense. Patrik _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Fri Jul 11 10:31:45 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A2763A694C; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 10:31:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BC763A67D9 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 10:31:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.832 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.832 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.233, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id csbXSyJj7c7Z for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 10:31:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B8D53A692B for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 10:31:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=p3.JCK.COM) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1KHMTQ-0004xO-AF; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 13:32:00 -0400 Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 13:31:59 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: apps-discuss@ietf.org Subject: FTP protocol extensions and updates Message-ID: <2A738A9E34659851081D5C0D@p3.JCK.COM> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Cc: douglas.papenthien@rhinosoft.com, "Mark P. Peterson" X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Subject: FTP Extensions and Updates Hi. We have proposals for a number of FTP extensions at various places in the queue, including draft-peterson-streamlined-ftp-command-extensions-04 and the long-overdue "TYPE U" proposal that was the original impetus for what is now RFC 5198. I have first-draft I-Ds for TYPE U and for an IANA registry for FTP Extensions ready to go up as soon as the pre-IETF blackout window closes. The question now is how people would like to process these extensions. Mark Peterson and Doug Papenthien think their document is just about ready to go and have implementation and running code for its features. "TYPE U" is essentially trivial now that the format itself is defined. If enough people are interested, it might be sensible to move toward a (hopefully short-lived) WG. If not, it would probably make sense to handle them as individual submissions, probably folding the substance of my two documents into draft-peterson... in the hope of handling everything through one Last Call. FWIW, I don't have any particular personal investment in any of this. The "TYPE U" document was prepared as the last step of what I seem to have volunteered for when I started the Unicode stream discussion several years ago and the registry document was started because it seemed to be the right thing to do. If people decide they want a WG, I will be looking for someone who wants to take over or share editing responsibilities on the two new drafts. If it is ok with Chris and Lisa, and especially if anyone has opinions in the interim, I'd like to spend a couple of minutes on FTP strategy at the Apps Area meeting. john _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Fri Jul 11 21:57:59 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A61C3A6AEB; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 21:57:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 854023A6AEB for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 21:57:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.087 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.087 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.490, BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=3.196, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Zpcp3mYIIReO for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 21:57:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B43F3A6A27 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 21:57:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KHXBT-0006Ok-VJ for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 04:58:11 +0000 Received: from rain.gmane.org ([80.91.229.7]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 04:58:11 +0000 Received: from hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz by rain.gmane.org with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 04:58:11 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: apps-discuss@ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" Subject: Re: FTP protocol extensions and updates Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 06:58:36 +0200 Organization: Lines: 32 Message-ID: References: <2A738A9E34659851081D5C0D@p3.JCK.COM> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: rain.gmane.org X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1914 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org John C Klensin wrote: > I have first-draft I-Ds for TYPE U and for an IANA > registry for FTP Extensions ready to go What is "type U", something like the "d" / "i" / "a" in ? > "TYPE U" is essentially trivial now that the format > itself is defined. Is this supposed to obsolete "feat UTF8" in RFC 2640 ? Looking into RFC 2640, this cries for an update, and the ftp URIs in RFC 1738 also need to be updated. RFC 3659 created an "OS specific filetypes" registry for ftp. I'm unsure what it is, because it is empty: http://www.iana.org/assignments/os-specific-parameters > If enough people are interested It would be nice to finish off RFC 1738 as part of the "Distributed Uri Decruft Experiment". File: and ftp: are still waiting, and a bunch of standards track RFCs with normative RFC 1738 references. > move toward a (hopefully short-lived) WG. +1 Frank _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Fri Jul 11 22:40:15 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12AFE28C0F3; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 22:40:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B82D28C0F3 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 22:40:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.484 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.484 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.015, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_RMML_Stock10=0.13] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KYk4gv2vyd7x for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 22:40:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50F763A6AEE for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 22:40:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=p3.JCK.COM) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1KHXqP-0004oz-Ts; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 01:40:30 -0400 Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 01:40:29 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: Frank Ellermann , apps-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: FTP protocol extensions and updates Message-ID: <29DC5012A9799AE3BC40DFEF@p3.JCK.COM> In-Reply-To: References: <2A738A9E34659851081D5C0D@p3.JCK.COM> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org --On Saturday, 12 July, 2008 06:58 +0200 Frank Ellermann wrote: > John C Klensin wrote: > >> I have first-draft I-Ds for TYPE U and for an IANA >> registry for FTP Extensions ready to go > > What is "type U", something like the "d" / "i" / "a" > in ? It is a TYPE, as defined in the FTP base spec, with values like "A", "E", "I", or "L". >> "TYPE U" is essentially trivial now that the format >> itself is defined. > > Is this supposed to obsolete "feat UTF8" in RFC 2640 ? 2640, despite its more general title, is entirely about use of FTP with file systems that use non-ASCII file and directory names and information in command streams more generally. While those are worthwhile and arguably necessary extensions, it is independent of the desire to use a common-wire-format text string type for the data stream, which is the topic of the new I-D. Please either study the discussion of TYPE in RFC 959 or wait until the draft appears. > Looking into RFC 2640, this cries for an update, and > the ftp URIs in RFC 1738 also need to be updated. 2640 was published nine years ago. If it is in need of an update now, either that update should reflect enough operational experience to move it to Draft Standard, or the operational experience would suggest major changes (implying a need for buy-in from the relevant user and vendor communities), or it has been implemented and deployed infrequently enough that it should be moved to Historic instead. I don't know which case applies. However, I would note that any attempt to update it would probably involve a fair amount of editorial work since (i) it uses names for sections that are no longer permitted, (ii) it doesn't distinguish between normative and informative references, (iii) it uses an older definition of ABNF, so that all ABNF would need to be reviewed for consistency with the newer version, (iv) it uses boilerplate terminology that is inconsistent with Checklist requirements, (v) it contains illustrative grammar rather than a single comprehensive definitional grammar, and so on. At least it does not appear to contain any non-2606 domain names in examples :-(. That list is, of course, independent of more substantive issues such as being defined against ISO 10646:1993, Unicode 2.0, and the old and slightly ambiguous form of UTF-8. > RFC 3659 created an "OS specific filetypes" registry > for ftp. I'm unsure what it is, because it is empty: > http://www.iana.org/assignments/os-specific-parameters > >> If enough people are interested > > It would be nice to finish off RFC 1738 as part of the > "Distributed Uri Decruft Experiment". File: and ftp: > are still waiting, and a bunch of standards track RFCs > with normative RFC 1738 references. > >> move toward a (hopefully short-lived) WG. > > +1 Yes, I think the cleanup work you identify could be strong justification for a WG... if there are sufficient people around who have the interest, energy, and active involvement with FTP (i.e., "skin in the game" or "buy-in from the relevant community") needed to populate such a WG. Conversely, the more work one thinks about assigning to such a WG the less likely it is that adequate resources can be found to do that work. john _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Sat Jul 12 02:20:29 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FD083A6B50; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 02:20:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 642523A6B50 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 02:20:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.548 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.038, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZDi5r3x+DBi6 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 02:20:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp (scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp [133.2.251.195]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B76B3A69E6 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 02:20:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scmse3.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.253.23]) by scmailgw2.scop.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id m6C8Ugof009257 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:30:45 +0900 (JST) Received: from (unknown [133.2.206.133]) by scmse3.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp with smtp id 6b7c_d10e65ea_4fec_11dd_83bd_001d0969ab06; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:30:42 +0900 Received: from Tanzawa.it.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.210.1]:45351) by itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp with [XMail 1.22 ESMTP Server] id for from ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:24:44 +0900 Message-Id: <6.0.0.20.2.20080712164945.0968a0a0@localhost> X-Sender: duerst@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6J Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 16:50:46 +0900 To: "Frank Ellermann" , apps-discuss@ietf.org From: Martin Duerst Subject: Re: FTP protocol extensions and updates In-Reply-To: References: <2A738A9E34659851081D5C0D@p3.JCK.COM> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org At 13:58 08/07/12, Frank Ellermann wrote: >Looking into RFC 2640, this cries for an update, Can you be more specific? John has mentioned a long list, is that what you thought about, or something else? Regards, Martin. #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Sat Jul 12 07:12:43 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3145A3A69E6; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 07:12:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F8C83A691C for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 07:12:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.548 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.051, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mG+4rKLlsXlM for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 07:12:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51C4B3A69E6 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 07:12:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=p3.JCK.COM) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1KHfqJ-000MV0-Rv; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 10:12:56 -0400 Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 10:12:55 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: Martin Duerst , Frank Ellermann , apps-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: FTP protocol extensions and updates Message-ID: <618A2472FEA5F6597139A59B@p3.JCK.COM> In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.20.2.20080712164945.0968a0a0@localhost> References: <2A738A9E34659851081D5C0D@p3.JCK.COM> <6.0.0.20.2.20080712164945.0968a0a0@localhost> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org --On Saturday, 12 July, 2008 16:50 +0900 Martin Duerst wrote: > At 13:58 08/07/12, Frank Ellermann wrote: > >> Looking into RFC 2640, this cries for an update, > > Can you be more specific? John has mentioned a long list, > is that what you thought about, or something else? For the record, I wouldn't say "cries for an update" about 2640. If the implementation experience and interoperability results are adequate, I think it would be good to clarify it and advance it in level, but really no more so than with dozens (or hundreds) of other Proposed Standard documents. My long list was, instead, an attempt to identify things in 2640 that would require work because of the difference between norms for construction of documents when it was written and the expectations and requirements imposed by the IESG today. I believe that they represent far more work than the update Frank thinks necessary and might act as an impediment to updating this document. And that is the major reason why an update or maturity-level upgrade to it (and other FTP specs) was not included in my initial note. john _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Sat Jul 12 10:23:47 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92B7F3A6B99; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 10:23:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B3013A6AA8 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 10:23:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.033 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.033 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.436, BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=3.196, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W3ykl5ESlWlq for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 10:23:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E4423A68FB for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 10:23:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KHipE-0006HQ-SC for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:24:00 +0000 Received: from rain.gmane.org ([80.91.229.7]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:24:00 +0000 Received: from hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz by rain.gmane.org with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:24:00 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: apps-discuss@ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" Subject: Re: FTP protocol extensions and updates Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 19:24:22 +0200 Organization: Lines: 14 Message-ID: References: <2A738A9E34659851081D5C0D@p3.JCK.COM> <6.0.0.20.2.20080712164945.0968a0a0@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: rain.gmane.org X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1914 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Martin Duerst wrong: > John has mentioned a long list, is that what you thought about Yes, I think he saw more points then I saw, and I wasn't sure if he proposed an effort to get a 2640bis as DS, or something else. I never before looked into this RFC, I checked the four "updated by" in RFC 959, after looking in Paul's last ftp URI draft. Any 0xFF in memos about telnet / ftp / UTF-8 attracts my attention, once bitten... Frank _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 15 19:40:06 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A28273A6892; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:40:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02DDC3A6892 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:40:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.419 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.419 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.120, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1Ig2Ere+VLnr for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:40:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 253923A67D4 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:40:05 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.30,370,1212364800"; d="scan'208";a="127224825" Received: from sj-dkim-1.cisco.com ([171.71.179.21]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 16 Jul 2008 02:40:34 +0000 Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (sj-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.177.237]) by sj-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m6G2eXHO006388; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:40:33 -0700 Received: from [192.168.4.177] (sjc-fluffy-vpn1.cisco.com [10.25.236.82]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id m6G2eXtN019427; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 02:40:33 GMT From: Cullen Jennings To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= In-Reply-To: Impp: xmpp:cullenfluffyjennings@jabber.org Subject: Re: draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 References: <20080707024501.AE0A33A6947@core3.amsl.com> <89A47DA0-8E2F-4247-A21F-E9B1777A0856@cisco.com> <20080708055828.GA6547@x27.adm.denic.de> Message-Id: <17123861-967B-4320-AB1D-E98C5D251BAE@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v928.1) Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:40:23 -0700 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.928.1) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=560; t=1216176034; x=1217040034; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim1004; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=fluffy@cisco.com; z=From:=20Cullen=20Jennings=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20draft-jennings-app-dns-update-00 |Sender:=20; bh=Nr7DxXjq9BJc00pH50yfTp1sRKlJbKjldcSON521OXQ=; b=oH8U8CMqJpxSpH9eg5nqYS+WooevwYeXmcaNonI9gPxE7COYCs90bBP3hp OVyopfUFA0shymCiE+E7Qahi/JDvW7q4k1kHdnTwmQoVyJGc1Cses0UMGBCT K9vnB/p0bGgrnK4FmuDhAWfoX6pQUauCR7H4BMxwF6yoGVq/dYM9Q=; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-1; header.From=fluffy@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim1004 verified; ); Cc: Peter Koch , apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org On Jul 9, 2008, at 1:19 AM, Patrik F=E4ltstr=F6m wrote: >> 1) We do have Dynamic Updates and EPP as "provisioning" protocols. >> Which deficiencies is this approach trying to address in particular? > > Specifically I see need for explicit text on why Dynamic Updates is = > "not good enough". Agree this section is needed. I'm not planning to do anything with = this draft before (or at) Dublin but if I revise the draft, I will add = a section about when it is appropriate and see if anything intelligent = can be put there. _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jul 16 11:42:44 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA2D63A67B5; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:42:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D25E3A6844 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:42:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -107.024 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.024 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.425, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fMIWT2f0C69n for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:42:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from laweleka.osafoundation.org (laweleka.osafoundation.org [204.152.186.98]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F8F33A67B5 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:42:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (laweleka.osafoundation.org [127.0.0.1]) by laweleka.osafoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09483142206; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:43:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new and clamav at osafoundation.org Received: from laweleka.osafoundation.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (laweleka.osafoundation.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ws+t+ea41nU5; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:43:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.1.142] (corp.collabrx.com [157.22.41.236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by laweleka.osafoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5BA914220E; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:42:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <6C66E5BB-6582-4AE5-9409-0438F7BC255B@osafoundation.org> From: Lisa Dusseault To: apps-discuss@ietf.org In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926) Subject: Re: FTP protocol extensions and updates Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:42:59 -0700 References: <2A738A9E34659851081D5C0D@p3.JCK.COM> <6.0.0.20.2.20080712164945.0968a0a0@localhost> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926) Cc: douglas.papenthien@rhinosoft.com, mark.peterson@rhinosoft.com, martin@rosenau-ka.de, dsomers@omz13.com, robmcm@microsoft.com X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org The Apparea open meeting will have some time allocated to discuss FTP extensions -- Monday July 28 at 9:00 am in Dublin. John Klensin suggested the topic so I've asked him to be on the hook for leading those 10 or more minutes. We'll be discussing what work needs to be done on FTP and for what deployed communities (e.g. what extent), and if the conclusion is that the IETF needs to do some work we may even get to discussing how. Current, unexpired I-Ds relating to FTP: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-peterson-streamlined-ftp-command-extensions-05 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hethmon-mcmurray-ftp-hosts-01 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rosenau-ftp-single-port-04 As always, meeting attendees are expected to read meeting documents before getting to the meeting! Advance discussion on this list is very welcome. Lisa On Jul 12, 2008, at 10:24 AM, Frank Ellermann wrote: > Martin Duerst wrong: > >> John has mentioned a long list, is that what you thought about > > Yes, I think he saw more points then I saw, and I wasn't sure if > he proposed an effort to get a 2640bis as DS, or something else. > > I never before looked into this RFC, I checked the four "updated > by" in RFC 959, after looking in Paul's last ftp URI draft. Any > 0xFF in memos about telnet / ftp / UTF-8 attracts my attention, > once bitten... > > Frank > > > _______________________________________________ > Apps-Discuss mailing list > Apps-Discuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jul 16 12:07:53 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 738C13A6844; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:07:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03AFC3A68B4 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:07:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -11.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HMqxqQg06UHq for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:07:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.microsoft.com (smtp.microsoft.com [131.107.115.212]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A3BF3A6844 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:07:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tk1-exhub-c101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.46.185) by TK5-EXGWY-E801.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.251.2; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:08:16 -0700 Received: from NA-EXMSG-C116.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.62.39]) by tk1-exhub-c101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.46.185]) with mapi; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:08:16 -0700 From: Robert McMurray To: 'Lisa Dusseault' , "apps-discuss@ietf.org" Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:08:15 -0700 Subject: RE: FTP protocol extensions and updates Thread-Topic: FTP protocol extensions and updates Thread-Index: Acjnc+pxKhBOWi9hQP6pYYmxPFUbIQAApakw Message-ID: <2A0C5133697D74488F4BD107A2429C2A5188A2702B@NA-EXMSG-C116.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> References: <2A738A9E34659851081D5C0D@p3.JCK.COM> <6.0.0.20.2.20080712164945.0968a0a0@localhost> <6C66E5BB-6582-4AE5-9409-0438F7BC255B@osafoundation.org> In-Reply-To: <6C66E5BB-6582-4AE5-9409-0438F7BC255B@osafoundation.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "douglas.papenthien@rhinosoft.com" , "mark.peterson@rhinosoft.com" , "dsomers@omz13.com" , "martin@rosenau-ka.de" X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Thanks, Lisa. The remaining work item that I have for the "draft-hethmon-mcmurray-ftp-hosts-01" document is the work that I've been doing regarding how HOST works with RFC2228 - "FTP Security Extensions". (e.g. The HOST command SHOULD precede AUTH in order to ensure proper certificate matching, etc.) I will not have an update to the draft before this meeting, however. Thanks again, Robert -----Original Message----- From: Lisa Dusseault [mailto:lisa@osafoundation.org] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 11:43 AM To: apps-discuss@ietf.org Cc: douglas.papenthien@rhinosoft.com; mark.peterson@rhinosoft.com; Robert McMurray; phethmon@hethmon.com; martin@rosenau-ka.de; dsomers@omz13.com Subject: Re: FTP protocol extensions and updates The Apparea open meeting will have some time allocated to discuss FTP extensions -- Monday July 28 at 9:00 am in Dublin. John Klensin suggested the topic so I've asked him to be on the hook for leading those 10 or more minutes. We'll be discussing what work needs to be done on FTP and for what deployed communities (e.g. what extent), and if the conclusion is that the IETF needs to do some work we may even get to discussing how. Current, unexpired I-Ds relating to FTP: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-peterson-streamlined-ftp-command-extensions-05 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hethmon-mcmurray-ftp-hosts-01 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rosenau-ftp-single-port-04 As always, meeting attendees are expected to read meeting documents before getting to the meeting! Advance discussion on this list is very welcome. Lisa _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jul 16 18:52:05 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 724CD3A69CE; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:52:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 309743A69CE for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:52:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.049, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hnErptIbnHEH for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:52:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B1CD3A67B3 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:52:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=p3.JCK.COM) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1KJIfW-000N8A-L8; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 21:52:30 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 21:52:29 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: Lisa Dusseault , apps-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: FTP protocol extensions and updates Message-ID: <03A0767957B7D55D879DCF0F@p3.JCK.COM> In-Reply-To: <6C66E5BB-6582-4AE5-9409-0438F7BC255B@osafoundation.org> References: <2A738A9E34659851081D5C0D@p3.JCK.COM> <6.0.0.20.2.20080712164945.0968a0a0@localhost> <6C66E5BB-6582-4AE5-9409-0438F7BC255B@osafoundation.org> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Cc: mark.peterson@rhinosoft.com, robmcm@microsoft.com, martin@rosenau-ka.de, dsomers@omz13.com X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Hi. Since I seem to have drawn the short straw, I would encourage those who are interested in this topic to also review the note I posted that started this thread https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/apps-discuss/2008-July/000072.html As it mentions, there are two drafts in the pipe in addition to the the ones Lisa listed. Neither has been posted because I missed the window, but I'll get them up as soon as I can. They are: "TYPE U" (will be posted as draft-klensin-ftp-typeu-00.txt). This draft introduces a new transfer TYPE, supplementing the existing TYPE A (ASCII) TYPE E (EBCDIC) TYPE L (Local byte) TYLE I (Image format, i.e., binary) with transfer of Unicode characters as specified in RFC 5198. And, because we are beginning to accumulate a fair number of extension commands and will have even more if the drafts Lisa lists are approved, a document that creates an IANA registry of FTP extensions (will be posted as draft-klensin-ftp-registry-00.txt). I'm happy to make the pre-posting versions of either or both documents available to anyone who is particularly interested. I would also carry Lisa's discussion topic a little bit further. FTP is, depending on how one counts, our oldest or second-oldest application protocol. The base spec is certainly not work done elsewhere and then brought to the IETF. With five drafts in various degrees of maturity, some of them proposing multiple extensions or updates, it seems to me that we have some obligation, at least a moral obligation, to either decide to look at this follow up work or to suggest where it should be done instead. If we decide we want to do it, the next question is whether we have, or how we find, sufficient interest and traction to form a WG and make progress in it or whether we have some other theory about getting the work done. john --On Wednesday, 16 July, 2008 11:42 -0700 Lisa Dusseault wrote: > > The Apparea open meeting will have some time allocated to > discuss FTP extensions -- Monday July 28 at 9:00 am in Dublin. > John Klensin suggested the topic so I've asked him to be on > the hook for leading those 10 or more minutes. We'll be > discussing what work needs to be done on FTP and for what > deployed communities (e.g. what extent), and if the conclusion > is that the IETF needs to do some work we may even get to > discussing how. > > Current, unexpired I-Ds relating to FTP: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-peterson-streamlined-ftp-com > mand-extensions-05 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hethmon-mcmurray-ftp-hosts-01 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rosenau-ftp-single-port-04 > > As always, meeting attendees are expected to read meeting > documents before getting to the meeting! Advance discussion > on this list is very welcome. _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 17 05:17:56 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A8253A6998; Thu, 17 Jul 2008 05:17:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BBB33A6998 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 2008 05:17:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.06 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.06 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.614, BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=3.196, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SUBJ_ALL_CAPS=2.077] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pqXzv2o9zkjW for ; Thu, 17 Jul 2008 05:17:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E9EE3A691F for ; Thu, 17 Jul 2008 05:17:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KJSRB-00056p-4g for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Jul 2008 12:18:21 +0000 Received: from rain.gmane.org ([80.91.229.7]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 2008 12:18:21 +0000 Received: from hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz by rain.gmane.org with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 2008 12:18:21 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: apps-discuss@ietf.org From: "Frank Ellermann" Subject: PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD CNRP 1.0//EN" Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 14:18:33 +0200 Organization: Lines: 29 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: rain.gmane.org X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1914 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Hi, I stumbled over an article about "SocialDNS" with a proposal of a new go: URI scheme, and one reply pointed out that another go: is defined in RFCs 3368 and 3367. RFC 3367 contains a DTD for queries to and anserws from go-servers, it has a PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD CNRP 1.0//EN" identifier. Several examples use the system identifier "http://ietf.org/dtd/cnrp-1.0.dtd", which doesn't exist. In theory I'd know how to fix that, send a request to IANA for a corresponding URN, and as a side effect IANA would store the DTD "somewhere". The URI of this file could then be used as system identifier, and submitted as erratum to fix the RFC 3367 examples. But something with this theoretical procedure is odd: Why create an IETF URN only to get an IETF URI ? The URN is in practice useless, there is no resolver. The URI is in theory a good system identifier, but IANA would need to know that they are not supposed to move the DTD, forever. For the RFC 2070 DTD I ignored this, the rules are the rules, and if they somehow do what is needed it's good enough. But now I wonder if those rules for IETF DTDs and other schemas are actually broken. Frank _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 21 14:06:06 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C5343A691E; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:06:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F68F3A6A05 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:06:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.465 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.465 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.134, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EN72a1aSQiJT for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:06:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A6293A691E for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:06:03 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.31,225,1215388800"; d="scan'208";a="67544550" Received: from sj-dkim-4.cisco.com ([171.71.179.196]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 21 Jul 2008 21:06:43 +0000 Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (sj-core-5.cisco.com [171.71.177.238]) by sj-dkim-4.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m6LL6hKa006279 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:06:43 -0700 Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.194]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m6LL6gaX018888 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:06:43 GMT From: "Dan Wing" To: Subject: apps-discuss archives Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:06:42 -0700 Message-ID: <18f901c8eb75$ad89cf50$c2f0200a@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Thread-Index: Acjrda0SA3PhlnX5TP2jsKxD8fK/5A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=319; t=1216674403; x=1217538403; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim4002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=dwing@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Dan=20Wing=22=20 |Subject:=20apps-discuss=20archives |Sender:=20; bh=Wb5UfN4t6tbsPr8qwIJAwB3iqz2Z5b0nEIK5WMcRc+g=; b=Y2fhK4+PW8JetH7TwqrPij/G2qqRu9B/eMNjwzqstWXsdH/OheAqzgTeus HKfNUJzbawf/ZzPbn1TZEc79m1fHI4mURcQycF8T6/+BQpkTtcHnUjvZQJeh YdUxdMelz8; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=dwing@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim4002 verified; ); X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss says: ... (The current archive is only available to the list members.) ... I realize that apps-discuss is not an IETF working group, so I suppose it does not need to follow IETF policy for open archives. But are the archives closed on purpose? -d _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 21 14:26:56 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27AB53A6896; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:26:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A93653A6882 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:26:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.812 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.812 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.212, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jQD-wTM51GA4 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:26:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from laweleka.osafoundation.org (laweleka.osafoundation.org [204.152.186.98]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5783A3A67DD for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:26:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (laweleka.osafoundation.org [127.0.0.1]) by laweleka.osafoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E007714220D; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:27:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new and clamav at osafoundation.org Received: from laweleka.osafoundation.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (laweleka.osafoundation.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id de8o3IzMSJY5; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:27:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.1.158] (corp.collabrx.com [157.22.41.236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by laweleka.osafoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99EC5142207; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:27:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1AF8810E-0BB7-4E05-823D-C452BB519E0F@osafoundation.org> From: Lisa Dusseault To: "Dan Wing" In-Reply-To: <18f901c8eb75$ad89cf50$c2f0200a@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926) Subject: Re: apps-discuss archives Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:27:21 -0700 References: <18f901c8eb75$ad89cf50$c2f0200a@cisco.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926) Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org It's an oversight I think -- as far as I can remember, this archive list used to be public. This list was in a bad state for a while after moving off the apps server quite a few months ago. A few days ago this was cleaned up so that the archive is now available but only to members. I'll ask the secretariat about making it public. Lisa On Jul 21, 2008, at 2:06 PM, Dan Wing wrote: > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss says: > > ... > (The current archive is only available to the list members.) > ... > > I realize that apps-discuss is not an IETF working group, so I > suppose it does > not need to follow IETF policy for open archives. But are the > archives closed > on purpose? > > -d > > _______________________________________________ > Apps-Discuss mailing list > Apps-Discuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 21 14:29:05 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 843963A6935; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:29:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B12983A6935 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:29:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.788 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.788 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.189, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vYIiuC3Ajbx5 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:29:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from laweleka.osafoundation.org (laweleka.osafoundation.org [204.152.186.98]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F2563A68CA for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:29:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (laweleka.osafoundation.org [127.0.0.1]) by laweleka.osafoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C41F14220D; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:29:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new and clamav at osafoundation.org Received: from laweleka.osafoundation.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (laweleka.osafoundation.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qEVcxF+w3LmV; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:29:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.1.158] (corp.collabrx.com [157.22.41.236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by laweleka.osafoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AE8D142207; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:29:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <26E3F787-A55B-4051-B7F5-464C34229CD7@osafoundation.org> From: Lisa Dusseault To: Lisa Dusseault In-Reply-To: <1AF8810E-0BB7-4E05-823D-C452BB519E0F@osafoundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926) Subject: Re: apps-discuss archives Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:29:33 -0700 References: <18f901c8eb75$ad89cf50$c2f0200a@cisco.com> <1AF8810E-0BB7-4E05-823D-C452BB519E0F@osafoundation.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926) Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org After a moment more thought I realized I could probably do this myself as list administrator. Done. Hope there were no objections. Lisa On Jul 21, 2008, at 2:27 PM, Lisa Dusseault wrote: > It's an oversight I think -- as far as I can remember, this archive > list used to be public. This list was in a bad state for a while > after moving off the apps server quite a few months ago. A few > days ago this was cleaned up so that the archive is now available > but only to members. I'll ask the secretariat about making it public. > > Lisa > > On Jul 21, 2008, at 2:06 PM, Dan Wing wrote: > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss says: >> >> ... >> (The current archive is only available to the list members.) >> ... >> >> I realize that apps-discuss is not an IETF working group, so I >> suppose it does >> not need to follow IETF policy for open archives. But are the >> archives closed >> on purpose? >> >> -d >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Apps-Discuss mailing list >> Apps-Discuss@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > Apps-Discuss mailing list > Apps-Discuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 24 14:10:31 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17E293A6809; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:10:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E2843A6809 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:10:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TVn6MFOpeNhG for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:10:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rhinosoft.com (mail.rhinosoft.com [209.242.232.34]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EE153A6780 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:10:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DOUGSNOTEBOOK ([67.37.101.148]) (authenticated user doug@rhinosoft.com) by rhinosoft.com (rhinosoft.com [209.242.232.34]) (MDaemon PRO v9.6.6) with ESMTP id md50006331973.msg for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:09:25 -0500 X-Spam-Processed: rhinosoft.com, Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:09:25 -0500 (not processed: spam filter heuristic analysis disabled) X-Authenticated-Sender: doug@rhinosoft.com X-MDRemoteIP: 67.37.101.148 X-Return-Path: douglas.papenthien@rhinosoft.com X-Envelope-From: douglas.papenthien@rhinosoft.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: apps-discuss@ietf.org Message-ID: From: "Douglas J. Papenthien" To: Subject: FTP Extension Drafts Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:09:24 -0500 Organization: Rhino Software, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16480 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16545 X-MDAV-Processed: rhinosoft.com, Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:09:25 -0500 X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Hello- As one of the authors of Streamlined FTP Command Extensions draft (draft-peterson-streamlined-ftp-command-extensions), I wanted to take a moment to express my support for the open meeting on Monday, July 28th to discuss pending work on the FTP protocol. Obviously, I have a personal interest in seeing this work to completion, however my motivations for doing so go beyond this. The FTP protocol may be one of the oldest protocols still in use today, but my experiences working with the protocol over the past 9 years have shown that it is far from being dead, irrelevant, or unimportant. If anything, I've seen competition for market share of FTP protocol implementations greatly increase in that time frame. If you believe that competition is at all any indication of the importance of this work, then I can assure you that it is there. I believe that a concerted effort to consolidate some of the additions and changes made to the protocol over the years would be greatly beneficial to the community and welcomed by many who rely upon this protocol for various purposes. Unfortunately, I will not be in attendance for the meeting this coming Monday, which is why I felt the need to express my support for it in this forum. However I will make full use of the Jabber room so that I can participate in whatever capacity necessary. Douglas J. Papenthien - Vice President http://www.RhinoSoft.com Voice: +1(262) 560-9627 FAX: +1(262) 560-9628 _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Sat Jul 26 14:28:45 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 860173A6ABA; Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:28:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA4AE3A6407 for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:22:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3pAa9q2WGP4U for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:22:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from otm-mgo01.iij.ad.jp (otm-mgo01.iij.ad.jp [210.138.20.175]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1FBB3A6825 for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:22:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: OTM-MO(otm-mgo01) id m6NHMr8L093965; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 02:22:53 +0900 (JST) Received: OTM-MIX(otm-mix01) id m6NHMqsu038553; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 02:22:52 +0900 (JST) Received: from [192.168.86.2] (h002n086.iij.ad.jp [192.168.86.2]) by rsmtp.iij.ad.jp (OTM-MR/rsmtp00) id m6NHMqXa039102 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 02:22:52 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <488768EE.7080008@iijlab.net> Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 02:22:54 +0900 From: "Ray S. Atarashi" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: apps-discuss@ietf.org Subject: App & Net Interaction drafts X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:28:44 -0700 X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org After the Application Area Architecture Workshop, we have continued to discuss the App & Net Interaction model and submitted the two Internet-Drafts. The Model for Net and App Interaction http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-atarashi-netappmodel-00.txt The VLAN Model for Applications http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ninomiya-netappvlan-00.txt Best Regards, Ray _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Sat Jul 26 14:28:45 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-discuss-archive@ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A148A3A6AC5; Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:28:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D8D428C13F for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:50:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ToRvX8Q8NjGc for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:50:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from otm-mgo00.iij.ad.jp (otm-mgo00.iij.ad.jp [210.138.20.174]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9957328C11F for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:50:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: OTM-MO(otm-mgo00) id m6P0od64065949; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 09:50:39 +0900 (JST) Received: OTM-MIX(otm-mix01) id m6P0odch056344; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 09:50:39 +0900 (JST) Received: from [192.168.190.102] (h102n190.iij.ad.jp [192.168.190.102]) by rsmtp.iij.ad.jp (OTM-MR/rsmtp01) id m6P0ocG5024277 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 09:50:39 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <48892361.209@iijlab.net> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 09:50:41 +0900 From: "Ray S. Atarashi" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: apps-discuss@ietf.org Subject: App & Net Interaction drafts X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:28:44 -0700 X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org After the Application Area Architecture Workshop, we have continued to discuss the App & Net Interaction model and submitted the two Internet-Drafts. The Model for Net and App Interaction http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-atarashi-netappmodel-00.txt The VLAN Model for Applications http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ninomiya-netappvlan-00.txt Best Regards, Ray _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss