Re: Last Call: 'The telnet URI Scheme' to Proposed Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



<inline>
Tom Petch
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Masinter" <LMM@xxxxxxx>
To: <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 1:55 AM
Subject: Re: Last Call: 'The telnet URI Scheme' to Proposed Standard


> I think it would be much more useful if we could update the
> document sufficiently to consider the telnet URI scheme
> for Draft Standard or Full Standard.
>
> The protocol itself meets the qualifications for a full
> Standard document; it is widely deployed with multiple independent
> implementations and has been quite stable for a long time.
>
mmmm protocol?  Telnet protocol is indeed as you describe but what is a URI?
STD66 defines it as an identifier of a resource and allows much flexibility as
to the nature of that resource so I see it as part of a namespace which makes
these RFC more like an IANA action, cataloging the identifier and its semantics.
What constitutes an implementation?  A web browser that parses it successfully?

Is this even Standards track?  I don't know:-(


<snip>


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]