On 08/15/2013 04:20 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 8/15/13 8:10 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >> On 08/15/2013 04:05 PM, Graham Klyne wrote: >>> Harald, >>> >>> Briefly: >>> >>> 1. Thanks for the reference, >>> >>> and >>> >>> 2. I misunderstood what you meant by "This is a format for a piece of >>> data". In light of your clarification, I withdraw my comments 3 & 4. >>> Identification of the STUN service would appear to be a perfectly >>> reasonable use. >>> >>> ... >>> >>> So the remaining issues from my questions are whether the intended >>> highly constrained use of these services justifies allocating a URI >>> scheme. >>> >>> If the community consensus is that it is of sufficient value, I might >>> suggest an annotation to the scheme registration along the lines of: >>> >>> "This URI scheme is intended for use in very specific NAT traversal >>> environments, and should not be used otherwise on the open Web or >>> Internet." >>> >>> Would such a comment run contrary to your expectations for its use? >> I would prefer to run the comment as "This scheme is intended for use in >> specific environments that involve NAT traversal. Users of the scheme >> need to carefully consider the security properties of the context in >> which they are using it." >> >> Echoing the warning in the STUN scheme - "use this when you know what >> you're doing only". >> >> Frankly, like Hadriel indicated, I have no idea whether it will be >> useful in other contexts or not, > I tend to think not. > >> and I'm hesitant to put language that >> seems to claim that we've evaluated all possible contexts > Agreed. > >> and say that >> there aren't other contexts in which it can be useful. > Too many negatives. :-) You are hesitant to say that it won't be useful > in other contexts, or you would prefer to say that it was designed for a > specific contexts and probably wouldn't be useful outside that context? I'm hesitant to say that it won't be useful in other contexts - that is, I'd prefer to say nothing about whether it will be useful elsewhere or not. Others understand other contexts better than I do; if they come forward (as Hadriel just did) and say "This is useful to me", I don't want the draft to say "Sorry, but we decided you can't use it". > > Peter >