I am somewhat surprised to see this I-D launched straight into IETF last call. Its predecessor, albeit with a somewhat wider focus, reached -04 in 2006 and I commented thereon on the ssh list. I see my comments have not been addressed in the intervening four years, and think that this I-D would benefit from a further review on the ssh list before proceeding further. I note that the I-D includes " This document is discussed on the IETF SSH list: ietf-ssh@xxxxxxxxxx" which is patently untrue (I am subscribed to that list and have seen nothing about this I-D on it; in fact, according to that web site, the list does not appear to exist or have archives) Tom Petch ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cullen Jennings" <fluffy@xxxxxxxxx> To: "The IETF" <ietf@xxxxxxxx> Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 9:25 PM Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-salowey-secsh-uri-00.txt> (Uniform ResourceIdentifier (URI) Scheme for Secure Shell (SSH)) to Proposed Standard > > Several things in this draft surprised me a bit thought nothing looked completely broken. I > > You need an IANA registry for the parameters and a way new parameters get added > > Do you need to say anything about encoding when the host name is an IPv6 address? > > It says the fingerprint is in 4716 format but the examples have ssh-dss in them that does not look like that format. I would have expected they type of the fingerprint to be on the left not the right of the equal sign so instead of > > fingerprint=ssh-dss-c1-b1-30-29-d7-b8-de-6c-97-77-10-d7-46-41-63-87@xxxxxxxxxxxx .com > > I would have expected > > md5-fingerprint=c1-b1-30-29-d7-b8-de-6c-97-77-10-d7-46-41-63-87@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > I was surprised to see the c-param added to the user instead of the right hand side of URI > > so Instead of > ssh://user;foo=bar@xxxxxxxxxxx > > I would have expected > ssh://user@xxxxxxxxxxx;foo=bar > > I was surprised that the c-param required the equal so I can not have a parameter like "useFooMode" but must instead have a parameter like "useFooMode=1" > > I'd be interesting hearing the logic or why the "//" - I'll point out XMPP, SIP, email, etc don't see to have this > > GIven a major use of SSH is SCP, I wish this URI worked for file paths as well > > The draft says > This document is discussed on the IETF SSH list: ietf-ssh@xxxxxxxxxx > > I realize that was the list for the closed WG but I don't think that is an IETF list. It is not under IETF rules and is not listedhttp://www.ietf.org/list/nonwg.html. I would highly suggest moving the conversation to an IETF list. > > > On Nov 17, 2010, at 11:58 AM, The IESG wrote: > > > > > The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider > > the following document: > > - 'Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) Scheme for Secure Shell (SSH)' > > <draft-salowey-secsh-uri-00.txt> as a Proposed Standard > > > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > > ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2010-12-15. Exceptionally, comments may be > > sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the > > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > > > The file can be obtained via > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-salowey-secsh-uri/ > > > > IESG discussion can be tracked via > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-salowey-secsh-uri/ > > > > > > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. > > _______________________________________________ > > IETF-Announce mailing list > > IETF-Announce@xxxxxxxx > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf