Re: [DNSOP] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dnsop-onion-tld-00.txt> (The .onion Special-Use Domain Name) to Proposed Standard

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

 



On Aug 10, 2015, at 3:54 PM, Darcy Kevin (FCA) <kevin.darcy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In retrospect, the definition of the “http” and “https” schemes (i.e. RFC 7230) should have probably enumerated clearly which name registries were acceptable for those schemes,

I generally try to avoid enumerating things that are known to be false. All URI schemes that use authority
intentionally refer to the local mechanism of name lookup, even if that name lookup only uses DNS as the last
in a long line of alternative registries.  The client is responsible for choosing a mechanism which produces
a correct mapping for any given authority, regardless of whether that is defined for them by /etc/host, WINS,
DNS, third-party https-based DNS lookup, etc. The folks referring to resources using those schemes are
responsible for making those references unambiguous, usually by naming convention rather than any
specific set of syntax rules.

....Roy


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