[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xri] PLEASE REVIEW: Draft of XRI-As-Relative-URI page
Thanks John. I am good with moving forward with
this. I think if these compromises move us forward they are worth it. I personally feel that xri: is needed for native resolution but
we can put that debate on the back burner to see where XRI and Identity go in
the future. From: John Bradley
[mailto:jbradley@mac.com] On 14-Oct-08, at 7:39 PM, Chasen, Les wrote:
Will I be considered not compliant if I run my proxy at
proxy.chasen.us without associating to a domain that matches the magic
pattern? If I was to run a mission critical system at
proxy.chasen.us I don’t think I would want any dependence on the magic
.xri zone. I assume this is ok as long as I am ok with the fact
that applications our there would not recognize my HXRIs as actual HXRIs.
That is ok since it is my mission critical system. The specialness of the domain name is only for the automatic
recognition of HXRI. Your mission critical application is
probably using native XRI resolution or is configured to use your local proxy. If you put http://proxy.chasen.us/=les
in some document on the web there would be no automatic way for an app
to recognize it as a HXRI. If that is a problem for you don't
use your local proxy in web docs on the net. Use http://xri.net/=les It is largely the status quo.
I am really curious what tricks you have in mind for that magic
xri zone. I am thinking of some sort of proxy DNS server.
Wouldn’t http://equal.xri.net/*les be considered an HXRI under this
scheme? We can make a rule to exclude ranges under xri.net. It
isn't a significant problem. We could change the names of
equals.xri.net etc but that is probably un neccicary.
Are we still planning on applying for xri: for native xri
resolution? We never used xri: for native resolution. About the only place we used it was in
XML name-spacing. We are trying to go through this process to the end before
deciding if we still need to register xri:
What about my last question? What is the criteria for one
to request a new scheme? The ITEF has criteria but it is vague at the moment.
The W3C will oppose new registrations and the IETF
will likely give that significant weight in there deliberations. I think the W3C have said that there is no justification
that they can conceive of for a new scheme. Now we may change that through working this through. =jbradley
From: John
Bradley [mailto:jbradley@mac.com] Les, Nothing will change with the
native form of an XRI =les is still =les. Nothing changes with native
XRI resolution or authority servers. This is just the binding to
http(s) for the proxy resolver service. We would develop similar
proxy resolver bindings for other URI schemes. Anyone can still set up a proxy
resolver on any domain name. The "special domain
names" like the TLD XRI would be used as a signal to applications that
they are dealing with a HXRI. If you use proxy.chasen.us applications
may not recognize HXRI in documents as HXRI and treat them as http:
URI. This is the current situation. To make this work as a http
sub-scheme for arbitrary proxies we need to do something tricky with DNS so
that proxy.chasen.us.xri returns the IP address for proxy.chasen.us. Idealy something automated could
be set up. =jbradley On 14-Oct-08, at 7:02 PM, Chasen,
Les wrote:
Are we doing away with xri: altogether? Is it still ok to refer to an XRI as =les or does it have to
start with a scheme in which a binding exists? http://xri.net, and all of
it’s proposed forms, are still considered a proxy server, right? Is
there any changes to where authority resolution servers should reside? If
no, is there confusion introduced by having at.xri.net and equal.xri.net? Given this plan to change from a pattern of deducing a HXRI from
‘xri.*’ to something like ‘*.xri’ or
‘*.xri.net’ how does one bring up their own proxy. Would I be
breaking with compliance if I ran a proxy at proxy.chasen.us? What about
running my own authority resolution server at auth.chasen.us? Have we ever determined a criteria for new schemes? From: Drummond
Reed [mailto:drummond.reed@cordance.net] XRI TC Members and Observers: Per my action item from the last telecon, I have posted a first
draft wiki page describing the XRI-As-Relative-URI proposal to: The next step is for TC members to review and comment on this page.
As always, being a wiki, feel free to just go in and edit the page. Or, if you
prefer, send feedback or question to the list. The goal is to incorporate any feedback by Wednesday so we can
begin sending messages to the W3C TAG public mailing list to solicit feedback
there before our next telecon this coming Thursday. Thanks, =Drummond |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]