From paulej@packetizer.com Wed Jul 3 21:36:58 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E000911E8129 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2013 21:36:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BJXz2ZJkfcNc for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2013 21:36:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82BBD11E811A for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2013 21:36:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r644akBB028537 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 4 Jul 2013 00:36:46 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1372912607; bh=Yr0fAVMRLyWzvQ9fd3F/LS2Q5l8LFw2xI+S8GTddpYk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=sKA5NYk9bZoT15ZhP69XMK5n2qjJBp8eCGHqSXNgzqM/safVbrKYz/hygMZkvl+dq yE9V+dUZJXi4oU7avKqZlazr7H3iHFfq4HSojxWlLx9RmDYwMf0KhdH7c29VkIP1r/ 77T7aBtULnWbJx3Rata2LyxxqJ9nJs7hDsZDKTV4= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Mike Jones'" , "'Pete Resnick'" , "'Barry Leiba'" Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2013 00:37:21 -0400 Message-ID: <0a8601ce7870$2ceef090$86ccd1b0$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac54b/+RVaeOYKm0QymkYkIBmSl/TQ== Content-Language: en-us Cc: 'salvatore loreto' , 'webfinger' , 'Melvin Carvalho' , draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger@tools.ietf.org Subject: [webfinger] Revised WebFinger spec (draft -15) X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2013 04:36:59 -0000 Folks, Having reviewed the thread below and taken other input into consideration, I revised the WebFinger document and it now appears as draft -15. Here's a summary of changes and responses on some comments made: * Most significantly, I removed all of the contentious examples. I kept the OpenID Connect example and brought over an "http" example from RFC 6415. Neither should be contentious, since the first is a concrete example from OpenID and the second is an example that existed already in an RFC. No example email auto config, device: URI, or locating a blog given an email Address. * I did not change the language to say that WF is a framework. It is a protocol with a well-defined syntax, not unlike HTTP. What one requests and what payload, like HTTP, is really outside the scope of the spec. That said, Section 1 states that applications that desire to use WF must specify "properties, titles, and link relation types that are appropriate for the application". Is this sufficient to address this concern? * There was a suggestion to define a "rel" registry. Such a registry already exists: http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/ * Clarified that some server responses may have either an empty links array or no links array. (No change in behavior, but this clarification was requested.) * I removed text in section 4.5 that recommends the use of the acct URI scheme. Applications / usage specifications will indicate what scheme to use and we do not need to dance around this issue in the protocol spec. * A few minor edits (e.g., references and word choice) You can find the current text here: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger-15 Paul From barryleiba@gmail.com Thu Jul 4 07:59:42 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C7E821F99B7 for ; Thu, 4 Jul 2013 07:59:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.957 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.957 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.021, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kKjH8QSC9VVt for ; Thu, 4 Jul 2013 07:59:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qe0-x234.google.com (mail-qe0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c02::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83DA421F9991 for ; Thu, 4 Jul 2013 07:59:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qe0-f52.google.com with SMTP id i11so788715qej.39 for ; Thu, 04 Jul 2013 07:59:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=ZTFz46/y6R/VAzSIDWMbeZh0wOLKXnZ3pDpKVUQZUeY=; b=kHDvNB5h/iRD/ceZUiBuOgq1gKyVX+P62FghkZyLGeQlkYe46fXdsd0URUsLfv3s3q cQoN6bDE/hoe+AvvNLig27CbB7ltkXJ5i25SL7U8PJ3A444CyfAa4rW0R/jKEppD6rdi +Nu8T1l1watjwSYQzP7xLq1xuhEMHpMfP7mO1uBZjEpR0t6VYyWCxIvGc4FSmYdzGtOb FRzoONU1z1gA8wkm4xh5ONLwqOwkFeQ6nzfzOokzhpBETPnnVoSW2ZbPcPlgvC4pcCPh z+srdZSpx0kp6LF58nG+1M63/ur/h2AF9zhtWQt9R8mRm8C6t+XrjhxQiOGU5WLD7Z7Z sneA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.49.132.69 with SMTP id os5mr5143381qeb.48.1372949975898; Thu, 04 Jul 2013 07:59:35 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.224.216.201 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Jul 2013 07:59:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <0a8601ce7870$2ceef090$86ccd1b0$@packetizer.com> References: <0a8601ce7870$2ceef090$86ccd1b0$@packetizer.com> Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2013 10:59:35 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ABosMdgK3HM_zvCHes8Yc0CblgU Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: "Paul E. Jones" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Pete Resnick , "" , Mike Jones , Melvin Carvalho , salvatore loreto , webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Revised WebFinger spec (draft -15) X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2013 14:59:42 -0000 > Having reviewed the thread below and taken other input into consideration, I > revised the WebFinger document and it now appears as draft -15. Great. How do you think this version applies to the DISCUSS positions from Pete and Stephen? What are the next steps? Barry > Here's a summary of changes and responses on some comments made: > > * Most significantly, I removed all of the contentious examples. I kept > the OpenID Connect example and brought over an "http" example from RFC > 6415. > Neither should be contentious, since the first is a concrete example > from OpenID and the second is an example that existed already in an RFC. > No example email auto config, device: URI, or locating a blog given an > email > Address. > > * I did not change the language to say that WF is a framework. It is a > protocol > with a well-defined syntax, not unlike HTTP. What one requests and what > payload, like HTTP, is really outside the scope of the spec. That said, > Section 1 states that applications that desire to use WF must specify > "properties, titles, and link relation types that are appropriate for the > application". Is this sufficient to address this concern? > > * There was a suggestion to define a "rel" registry. Such a registry > already exists: http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/ > > * Clarified that some server responses may have either an empty links array > or no links array. (No change in behavior, but this clarification was > requested.) > > * I removed text in section 4.5 that recommends the use of the acct URI > scheme. Applications / usage specifications will indicate what scheme > to use and we do not need to dance around this issue in the protocol spec. > > * A few minor edits (e.g., references and word choice) > > You can find the current text here: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger-15 > > Paul From cyrus@daboo.name Fri Jul 5 07:17:40 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A9F11E82FD for ; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 07:17:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iEYceiUFP8eM for ; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 07:17:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [173.13.55.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EF1D11E82FC for ; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 07:17:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDBC6469CC4C for ; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 10:17:32 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at example.com Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (daboo.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IR1D5BQSuLd7 for ; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 10:17:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from caldav.corp.apple.com (unknown [17.45.162.46]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 12A2D469CC40 for ; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 10:17:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 10:17:27 -0400 From: Cyrus Daboo To: webfinger@ietf.org Message-ID: X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; size=541 Subject: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 14:17:40 -0000 Hi folks, I have recently posted a new version of the Automated Service Configuration draft (formerly known as Aggregated Service Discovery): . This protocol now makes use of webfinger to "bootstrap" discovery of the config document. Hopefully it will serve as a useful example of how webfinger can be used by specific applications. I would appreciate feedback from the webfinger community on how we have gone about using webfinger, thanks. -- Cyrus Daboo From markus.lanthaler@gmx.net Fri Jul 5 07:56:06 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1304E21F9C98; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 07:56:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.15 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.15 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT=1.449] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OV90dEUnQPhn; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 07:56:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DB0821F9C56; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 07:56:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Vostro3500 ([178.115.248.216]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MD9uq-1V0ces1Maq-00GVVj; Fri, 05 Jul 2013 16:55:48 +0200 From: "Markus Lanthaler" To: "'Cyrus Daboo'" References: In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 16:55:34 +0200 Message-ID: <012901ce798f$b9c87750$2d5965f0$@lanthaler@gmx.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Ac55imqGwUPLcTdDSJejAS51gZAvWQABI+wg Content-Language: de X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:BEQK/Iz8CC/ypinjUN2+0hdLXoiloLoiszCvTgX8fEBS1U4qWML C1GKLJzRA1Z1s9tcQDpZdWWHLeW93TJRxmvMvrkaT2HyuSyhRz+EWa5mP82f9Jd95+hi4R8 hTljZndJe8L8qfj6RXlvvVYifdEOg3865iujmBu4ZJJkJNZutNPLJGFZXpUnP8hBu0jYR0r mXkJ4ejQ5z8F0ECXJgncw== Cc: webfinger@ietf.org, apps-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 14:56:06 -0000 CC'ing apps-discuss On Friday, July 05, 2013 4:17 PM, Cyrus Daboo wrote: > Hi folks, > I have recently posted a new version of the Automated Service > Configuration > draft (formerly known as Aggregated Service Discovery): > discovery/>. > > This protocol now makes use of webfinger to "bootstrap" discovery of > the config document. Hopefully it will serve as a useful example of how > webfinger can be used by specific applications. I would appreciate > feedback from the webfinger community on how we have gone about using > webfinger, thanks. Looks good to me. The only thing that bugs me is that the " Automated Service Configuration Document Format" you define doesn't have its own media type. That will make it impossible to reuse in other scenarios and ambiguous how to process the target of a service-configuration link because other people may start using their own JSON flavors. I would suggest to define a media type or at list a profile URI to make this unambiguous. HTH, Markus -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler From paulej@packetizer.com Fri Jul 5 12:05:11 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAE6F21F9D17 for ; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 12:05:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ECtWrKlYY81z for ; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 12:05:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DB7421F9CDE for ; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 12:05:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r65J4raq007796 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 5 Jul 2013 15:04:53 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1373051096; bh=V0kgSz/zDftC9DjcWcTOto57EwsLCrnODdkObNc5n38=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=brHHBJDLwxHhf6gMOmrhPauc0xHVYCvKOf+v0p2k+s30M6a84BHUYjaqYx7/n/78n JrmkVYFDdYJid9s+vJv688fR6/PF6HAyj8qHwFflk+iQFCOQPJZfaI1eaRjUmgvHrY Ztpwr1DqD6IwueW9NeYCWUomcQhyCIeYHGhpnMC4= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Barry Leiba'" References: <0a8601ce7870$2ceef090$86ccd1b0$@packetizer.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 15:05:31 -0400 Message-ID: <0d5001ce79b2$a0980520$e1c80f60$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQK+xgiCySGmeoDt4xMNPiAxDqNw4QIMwAt4l2VtndA= Content-Language: en-us Cc: 'Pete Resnick' , draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger@tools.ietf.org, 'Mike Jones' , 'Melvin Carvalho' , 'salvatore loreto' , 'webfinger' , 'Stephen Farrell' Subject: Re: [webfinger] Revised WebFinger spec (draft -15) X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 19:05:11 -0000 Barry, > > Having reviewed the thread below and taken other input into > consideration, I > > revised the WebFinger document and it now appears as draft -15. > > Great. How do you think this version applies to the DISCUSS positions > from Pete and Stephen? What are the next steps? I hope this will address some of the "semantic gap" concerns Pete raised. By removing the example of locating a blog given an email address and, through the process, using an acct URI, we removed that "leap" taken from the document entirely. Related to that, there were questions raised about what URI one would use (e.g., acct URI or http or other). WF never intended to nail that down concretely, but there was a preference for acct when querying user accounts. We removed the wording related to the acct URI, which folks seemed to prefer. The URI one would use depends on the particular application. It seemed folks were agreeable to making that change. I hope that will close Peter's concern noted here: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/appsawg/trac/ticket/12 (Which is echoed in his DISCUSS item.) These items should be non-issues now since we removed the examples entirely: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/appsawg/trac/ticket/13 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/appsawg/trac/ticket/14 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/appsawg/trac/ticket/15 Stephen's comments were mostly related to privacy. None of the changes made were related to privacy, but we have enough comments about privacy to nearly scare a person into not wanting to use WF. (Really, I do think it's stronger wording than it should be, but people wanted to make it strong, I guess.) What I need are specific comments. He has a number of comments, but I'm not sure which ones he might still considers to be an issue. I've copied him to this thread for input. If he could re-visit his comments and see which ones are still an issue, that would be great. Paul From jesse.thompson@doit.wisc.edu Mon Jul 8 06:11:58 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DA7421F99BF for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 06:11:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DKX0KsIpfpit for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 06:11:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpauth2.wiscmail.wisc.edu (wmauth2.doit.wisc.edu [144.92.197.222]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A176021F99A1 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 06:11:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed Received: from avs-daemon.smtpauth2.wiscmail.wisc.edu by smtpauth2.wiscmail.wisc.edu (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.01(7.0.4.27.0) 64bit (built Aug 30 2012)) id <0MPM00100C60N300@smtpauth2.wiscmail.wisc.edu> for webfinger@ietf.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 08:11:52 -0500 (CDT) X-Spam-PmxInfo: Server=avs-2, Version=6.0.2.2308539, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2013.7.8.130327, SenderIP=0.0.0.0 Received: from [192.168.1.129] (24-159-240-219.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com [24.159.240.219]) by smtpauth2.wiscmail.wisc.edu (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.01(7.0.4.27.0) 64bit (built Aug 30 2012)) with ESMTPSA id <0MPM005B5CNQ0D20@smtpauth2.wiscmail.wisc.edu> for webfinger@ietf.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 08:11:50 -0500 (CDT) Message-id: <51DABAC6.4090305@doit.wisc.edu> Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 08:12:38 -0500 From: Jesse Thompson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 To: webfinger@ietf.org References: In-reply-to: Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 13:11:58 -0000 On 7/5/13 9:17 AM, Cyrus Daboo wrote: > Hi folks, > I have recently posted a new version of the Automated Service > Configuration draft (formerly known as Aggregated Service Discovery): > . > > > This protocol now makes use of webfinger to "bootstrap" discovery of the > config document. Hopefully it will serve as a useful example of how > webfinger can be used by specific applications. I would appreciate > feedback from the webfinger community on how we have gone about using > webfinger, thanks. Since "the target FQDN is not in the queried domain" will apply to the vast majority of email/calendar domains (hosted by Google, Microsoft, etc): When it comes to practical implementation, essentially no clients will bother to "verify with the user that the link URI target FQDN is suitable for use before executing any connections to the host", especially if they already have an auto-config scheme that doesn't prompt the user (e.g. Thunderbird). It might be beneficial to the adoption of this standard to bake in a method of secure delegation that could work from day one. Jesse From stpeter@stpeter.im Mon Jul 8 12:46:25 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31A0021F9C4D for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 12:46:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.53 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.53 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.069, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o-LaFQPUYo7W for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 12:46:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10D4821F9C34 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 12:46:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ergon.local (unknown [128.107.239.234]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0C63D413B8; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:47:20 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <51DB170A.9070400@stpeter.im> Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 13:46:18 -0600 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: webfinger@ietf.org References: <51DABAC6.4090305@doit.wisc.edu> In-Reply-To: <51DABAC6.4090305@doit.wisc.edu> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 19:46:25 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 7/8/13 7:12 AM, Jesse Thompson wrote: > On 7/5/13 9:17 AM, Cyrus Daboo wrote: >> Hi folks, I have recently posted a new version of the Automated >> Service Configuration draft (formerly known as Aggregated Service >> Discovery): >> . >> >> >> This protocol now makes use of webfinger to "bootstrap" discovery of the >> config document. Hopefully it will serve as a useful example of >> how webfinger can be used by specific applications. I would >> appreciate feedback from the webfinger community on how we have >> gone about using webfinger, thanks. > > Since "the target FQDN is not in the queried domain" will apply to > the vast majority of email/calendar domains (hosted by Google, > Microsoft, etc): > > When it comes to practical implementation, essentially no clients > will bother to "verify with the user that the link URI target FQDN > is suitable for use before executing any connections to the host", > especially if they already have an auto-config scheme that doesn't > prompt the user (e.g. Thunderbird). > > It might be beneficial to the adoption of this standard to bake in > a method of secure delegation that could work from day one. Hi Jesse, do you have anything in mind? One option might be POSH: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-posh/ However, if the original query to the service domain goes to an HTTPS URI, then following a redirect from there to an HTTPS URI at the target domain seems like a form of secure delegation to me. That's the same model that Matt Miller and I outline in the POSH draft. If I've misunderstood your comment, please do let me know. :-) Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJR2xcKAAoJEOoGpJErxa2pin4P/3WZjKXbWnpjErNGAQm621ah 8T2Yt0mQyChZUpwcFpQqibi3Qf1Y0YdzVSpX0A21rCayF4lz9i+B3w4iJaUslUpC lPAxQudKBhSZOQlRAbac3UtMKW5g4beIswFbSVsNkhAHxAsRqvbGWD61sL+rmDzO t/BeOjuoqKhXPnSLCjONnDwU+7p79+wTozDMhEtAvdiAoM5qYu8pxn+INWC0yjiA Erl+xQisaW4t8Xc/2c+4XioLM1Hfi1AYpcc6SkZn2xO9k2d0aysudf1cvg/Yb/NV zmk+kpQ/j/nAqllMayWMa+nD6SBF3ymG4hxBL+yYdeamcdfblkBgi88ryyDYdGO7 RozGaflNDPw2icgXnav70914V7z9JNI1Y2tLZLxfs4Ag9ORBl5fbcew1phvBA5aR gg0JTalFQ5z+LkDZwTmMBG7mmoOyqBeFhITPmJf6iWLG92XbP1UBp+d4wxXmJgNN dWVNe6r9rEz1L5PyErtLtE3VzJUrEJTSx3fsqXd/nAkHvq3CRJVzfOo0c2gHCUaj zGkRw5v2WuPzQItaAhdH89Hp0n/6BV1my1fzg36wLmxk2MFSRwpVQjadpyyBSEVv 7HP7bClYAN15bxnorS5DKkrRqH3pVHh+fxloQGVRi24ndNyt4r9wJ0CoSn1mJpgp Bg0mkbaxoqOBzte9QtAL =hzKu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jesse.thompson@doit.wisc.edu Mon Jul 8 13:03:01 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32CCC21F9A29 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:03:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6jvlo09LLzfL for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:02:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpauth2.wiscmail.wisc.edu (wmauth2.doit.wisc.edu [144.92.197.222]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1604221F99B8 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:02:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from avs-daemon.smtpauth2.wiscmail.wisc.edu by smtpauth2.wiscmail.wisc.edu (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.01(7.0.4.27.0) 64bit (built Aug 30 2012)) id <0MPM00I00VGRD900@smtpauth2.wiscmail.wisc.edu> for webfinger@ietf.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 15:02:55 -0500 (CDT) X-Spam-PmxInfo: Server=avs-2, Version=6.0.2.2308539, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2013.7.8.195119, SenderIP=0.0.0.0 Received: from dyn-72-33-102-9.uwnet.wisc.edu (dyn-72-33-102-9.uwnet.wisc.edu [72.33.102.9]) by smtpauth2.wiscmail.wisc.edu (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.01(7.0.4.27.0) 64bit (built Aug 30 2012)) with ESMTPSA id <0MPM0031WVOUDH20@smtpauth2.wiscmail.wisc.edu>; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 15:02:54 -0500 (CDT) User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-reply-to: <51DB170A.9070400@stpeter.im> References: <51DABAC6.4090305@doit.wisc.edu> <51DB170A.9070400@stpeter.im> From: Jesse Thompson Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 15:03:24 -0500 To: Peter Saint-Andre , webfinger@ietf.org Message-id: <123e94cf-ce7b-4c38-805e-e18ce0025d5e@email.android.com> Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 20:03:01 -0000 Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >On 7/8/13 7:12 AM, Jesse Thompson wrote: >> On 7/5/13 9:17 AM, Cyrus Daboo wrote: >>> Hi folks, I have recently posted a new version of the Automated >>> Service Configuration draft (formerly known as Aggregated Service >>> Discovery): >>> >. >>> >>> >>> >This protocol now makes use of webfinger to "bootstrap" discovery of >the >>> config document. Hopefully it will serve as a useful example of >>> how webfinger can be used by specific applications. I would >>> appreciate feedback from the webfinger community on how we have >>> gone about using webfinger, thanks. >> >> Since "the target FQDN is not in the queried domain" will apply to >> the vast majority of email/calendar domains (hosted by Google, >> Microsoft, etc): >> >> When it comes to practical implementation, essentially no clients >> will bother to "verify with the user that the link URI target FQDN >> is suitable for use before executing any connections to the host", >> especially if they already have an auto-config scheme that doesn't >> prompt the user (e.g. Thunderbird). >> >> It might be beneficial to the adoption of this standard to bake in >> a method of secure delegation that could work from day one. > >Hi Jesse, do you have anything in mind? > >One option might be POSH: > >http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-posh/ > >However, if the original query to the service domain goes to an HTTPS >URI, then following a redirect from there to an HTTPS URI at the >target domain seems like a form of secure delegation to me. That's the >same model that Matt Miller and I outline in the POSH draft. > >If I've misunderstood your comment, please do let me know. :-) Yes, I was assuming that would be a good option. Jesse > >Peter > >- -- >Peter Saint-Andre >https://stpeter.im/ > > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin) >Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org >Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ > >iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJR2xcKAAoJEOoGpJErxa2pin4P/3WZjKXbWnpjErNGAQm621ah >8T2Yt0mQyChZUpwcFpQqibi3Qf1Y0YdzVSpX0A21rCayF4lz9i+B3w4iJaUslUpC >lPAxQudKBhSZOQlRAbac3UtMKW5g4beIswFbSVsNkhAHxAsRqvbGWD61sL+rmDzO >t/BeOjuoqKhXPnSLCjONnDwU+7p79+wTozDMhEtAvdiAoM5qYu8pxn+INWC0yjiA >Erl+xQisaW4t8Xc/2c+4XioLM1Hfi1AYpcc6SkZn2xO9k2d0aysudf1cvg/Yb/NV >zmk+kpQ/j/nAqllMayWMa+nD6SBF3ymG4hxBL+yYdeamcdfblkBgi88ryyDYdGO7 >RozGaflNDPw2icgXnav70914V7z9JNI1Y2tLZLxfs4Ag9ORBl5fbcew1phvBA5aR >gg0JTalFQ5z+LkDZwTmMBG7mmoOyqBeFhITPmJf6iWLG92XbP1UBp+d4wxXmJgNN >dWVNe6r9rEz1L5PyErtLtE3VzJUrEJTSx3fsqXd/nAkHvq3CRJVzfOo0c2gHCUaj >zGkRw5v2WuPzQItaAhdH89Hp0n/6BV1my1fzg36wLmxk2MFSRwpVQjadpyyBSEVv >7HP7bClYAN15bxnorS5DKkrRqH3pVHh+fxloQGVRi24ndNyt4r9wJ0CoSn1mJpgp >Bg0mkbaxoqOBzte9QtAL >=hzKu >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >_______________________________________________ >webfinger mailing list >webfinger@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. From stpeter@stpeter.im Mon Jul 8 13:04:14 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A896E21F9A57 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:04:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.534 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.534 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.065, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ccg7KbLZSpal for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:04:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EB8421F9A29 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:04:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ergon.local (unknown [128.107.239.233]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 54735413B8; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 14:05:10 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <51DB1B37.9010007@stpeter.im> Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 14:04:07 -0600 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: webfinger@ietf.org References: <51DABAC6.4090305@doit.wisc.edu> <51DB170A.9070400@stpeter.im> <123e94cf-ce7b-4c38-805e-e18ce0025d5e@email.android.com> In-Reply-To: <123e94cf-ce7b-4c38-805e-e18ce0025d5e@email.android.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 20:04:14 -0000 On 7/8/13 2:03 PM, Jesse Thompson wrote: > > > Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > > On 7/8/13 7:12 AM, Jesse Thompson wrote: >>>> On 7/5/13 9:17 AM, Cyrus Daboo wrote: >>>>> Hi folks, I have recently posted a new version of the Automated >>>>> Service Configuration draft (formerly known as Aggregated Service >>>>> Discovery): >>>>> > . >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > This protocol now makes use of webfinger to "bootstrap" discovery of > the >>>>> config document. Hopefully it will serve as a useful example of >>>>> how webfinger can be used by specific applications. I would >>>>> appreciate feedback from the webfinger community on how we have >>>>> gone about using webfinger, thanks. >>>> >>>> Since "the target FQDN is not in the queried domain" will apply to >>>> the vast majority of email/calendar domains (hosted by Google, >>>> Microsoft, etc): >>>> >>>> When it comes to practical implementation, essentially no clients >>>> will bother to "verify with the user that the link URI target FQDN >>>> is suitable for use before executing any connections to the host", >>>> especially if they already have an auto-config scheme that doesn't >>>> prompt the user (e.g. Thunderbird). >>>> >>>> It might be beneficial to the adoption of this standard to bake in >>>> a method of secure delegation that could work from day one. > > Hi Jesse, do you have anything in mind? > > One option might be POSH: > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-posh/ > > However, if the original query to the service domain goes to an HTTPS > URI, then following a redirect from there to an HTTPS URI at the > target domain seems like a form of secure delegation to me. That's the > same model that Matt Miller and I outline in the POSH draft. > > If I've misunderstood your comment, please do let me know. :-) > >> Yes, I was assuming that would be a good option. OK, so we might want some text about that, which probably could be borrowed or adapted from the POSH document. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ From bortzmeyer@nic.fr Mon Jul 8 13:28:18 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 359CB21F9DEF for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:28:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eTS1TQ1T3vhf for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:28:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.bortzmeyer.org (aetius.bortzmeyer.org [217.70.190.232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BE2A21F9CF1 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:28:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 83D263B5B6; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 20:28:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 407801A8893; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 22:26:25 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 22:26:25 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: "Paul E. Jones" Message-ID: <20130708202625.GA30054@sources.org> References: <0a8601ce7870$2ceef090$86ccd1b0$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0a8601ce7870$2ceef090$86ccd1b0$@packetizer.com> X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 7.1 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Revised WebFinger spec (draft -15) X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 20:28:18 -0000 On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 12:37:21AM -0400, Paul E. Jones wrote a message of 47 lines which said: > I revised the WebFinger document and it now appears as draft -15. I studied it and, IMHO, it addresses the concerns I've raised here. I find the changes quite sensible and consistent. Editorial note: > suppose a mail client was configured to automatically perform a > WebFinger query as discussed in the example in Section 3.1. Should probably be deleted since it refers to an example which no longer exists. From ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com Mon Jul 8 13:36:50 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 376AE21F9D7C for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:36:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PO5rw2SpRgrl for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:36:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-f43.google.com (mail-pa0-f43.google.com [209.85.220.43]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFF0221F9C34 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:36:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id hz11so4739949pad.2 for ; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 13:36:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to:x-mailer:x-gm-message-state; bh=bMueZGPyo7icovk8eyZZYFm1E+MtGi7R/rA/lEhlov0=; b=MJzuw3QVAyfp719461/V8IDgBBLqP22K6v7xWukioT6d694uzcIwO/alQJcVCple5c tpCmgoHFNMUyrQ2POWsFYTWhx1o5popLkJCskhB3dRAdmEaECjlsgCXLzBs9SFdRSfDT qquRWpBL8hOVzMVmZOieXvTmKYfDjQfqr6PpFoaDNwzjQ1yqkUZrpg0Q8bV+bA09vXsI hB1qd6FTTc99hd2v7wl7YrTLaHi/+U3JR2z17hlHQeFvgogPSmzK84GKbtvN56m0gzml GqCeGL8RxZFN6jxFWKXwZDgWwaiC+w0BcUhEl9rtNsmTYXuy7JsY4D7E3m8eYhMQmsyr 359g== X-Received: by 10.66.146.105 with SMTP id tb9mr24918155pab.89.1373315805057; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 13:36:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.71.223.190] ([12.232.193.126]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id y6sm24153804pbl.23.2013.07.08.13.36.42 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 08 Jul 2013 13:36:43 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_ADBEEF84-C56B-4249-9CF8-9E4A4E8349D8"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) From: John Bradley In-Reply-To: <51DB1B37.9010007@stpeter.im> Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:36:42 -0700 Message-Id: References: <51DABAC6.4090305@doit.wisc.edu> <51DB170A.9070400@stpeter.im> <123e94cf-ce7b-4c38-805e-e18ce0025d5e@email.android.com> <51DB1B37.9010007@stpeter.im> To: Peter Saint-Andre X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk+VKQter54KJhCYqA+Yah4yxBmZ0pNFDa2JZOjSN2vcK4g/7tlmYpOsSeXY+1Qg0XcOOQD Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 20:36:50 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_ADBEEF84-C56B-4249-9CF8-9E4A4E8349D8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In Sec 4.2 WF currently allows redirecting requests from a https: uri to = another https: uri. The problem is mostly domains that don't have any sort of secure web = hosting to redirect from. John B. On 2013-07-08, at 1:04 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 7/8/13 2:03 PM, Jesse Thompson wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >>=20 >> On 7/8/13 7:12 AM, Jesse Thompson wrote: >>>>> On 7/5/13 9:17 AM, Cyrus Daboo wrote: >>>>>> Hi folks, I have recently posted a new version of the Automated >>>>>> Service Configuration draft (formerly known as Aggregated Service >>>>>> Discovery):=20 >>>>>>=20 >> = . >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >> This protocol now makes use of webfinger to "bootstrap" discovery of >> the >>>>>> config document. Hopefully it will serve as a useful example of >>>>>> how webfinger can be used by specific applications. I would >>>>>> appreciate feedback from the webfinger community on how we have >>>>>> gone about using webfinger, thanks. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Since "the target FQDN is not in the queried domain" will apply to >>>>> the vast majority of email/calendar domains (hosted by Google, >>>>> Microsoft, etc): >>>>>=20 >>>>> When it comes to practical implementation, essentially no clients >>>>> will bother to "verify with the user that the link URI target FQDN >>>>> is suitable for use before executing any connections to the host",=20= >>>>> especially if they already have an auto-config scheme that doesn't=20= >>>>> prompt the user (e.g. Thunderbird). >>>>>=20 >>>>> It might be beneficial to the adoption of this standard to bake in >>>>> a method of secure delegation that could work from day one. >>=20 >> Hi Jesse, do you have anything in mind? >>=20 >> One option might be POSH: >>=20 >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-posh/ >>=20 >> However, if the original query to the service domain goes to an HTTPS >> URI, then following a redirect from there to an HTTPS URI at the >> target domain seems like a form of secure delegation to me. That's = the >> same model that Matt Miller and I outline in the POSH draft. >>=20 >> If I've misunderstood your comment, please do let me know. :-) >>=20 >>> Yes, I was assuming that would be a good option.=20 >=20 > OK, so we might want some text about that, which probably could be > borrowed or adapted from the POSH document. >=20 > Peter >=20 > --=20 > Peter Saint-Andre > https://stpeter.im/ >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger --Apple-Mail=_ADBEEF84-C56B-4249-9CF8-9E4A4E8349D8 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=smime.p7s Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name=smime.p7s Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIN8TCCBjQw ggQcoAMCAQICASAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwfTELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0 Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxKTAn BgNVBAMTIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTA3MTAyNDIxMDI1NVoX DTE3MTAyNDIxMDI1NVowgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSsw KQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFy dENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMsohUWcASz7GfKrpTOMKqANy9BV7V0igWdGxA8IU77L3aTxErQ+ fcxtDYZ36Z6GH0YFn7fq5RADteP0AYzrCA+EQTfi8q1+kA3m0nwtwXG94M5sIqsvs7lRP1aycBke /s5g9hJHryZ2acScnzczjBCAo7X1v5G3yw8MDP2m2RCye0KfgZ4nODerZJVzhAlOD9YejvAXZqHk sw56HzElVIoYSZ3q4+RJuPXXfIoyby+Y2m1E+YzX5iCZXBx05gk6MKAW1vaw4/v2OOLy6FZH3XHH tOkzUreG//CsFnB9+uaYSlR65cdGzTsmoIK8WH1ygoXhRBm98SD7Hf/r3FELNvUCAwEAAaOCAa0w ggGpMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgEGMB0GA1UdDgQWBBSuVYNv7DHKufcd +q9rMfPIHeOsuzAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBROC+8apEBbpRdphzDKNGhD0EGu8jBmBggrBgEFBQcBAQRa MFgwJwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGG2h0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jYTAtBggrBgEFBQcwAoYh aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vc2ZzY2EuY3J0MFsGA1UdHwRUMFIwJ6AloCOGIWh0dHA6 Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3Nmc2NhLmNybDAnoCWgI4YhaHR0cDovL2NybC5zdGFydHNzbC5j b20vc2ZzY2EuY3JsMIGABgNVHSAEeTB3MHUGCysGAQQBgbU3AQIBMGYwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwNAYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKGh0dHA6Ly93d3cu c3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2ludGVybWVkaWF0ZS5wZGYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggIBADqpJw3I07QW ke9plNBpxUxcffc7nUrIQpJHDci91DFG7fVhHRkMZ1J+BKg5UNUxIFJ2Z9B90Micc/NXcs7kPBRd n6XGO/vPc87Y6R+cWS9Nc9+fp3Enmsm94OxOwI9wn8qnr/6o3mD4noP9JphwUPTXwHovjavRnhUQ HLfo/i2NG0XXgTHXS2Xm0kVUozXqpYpAdumMiB/vezj1QHQJDmUdPYMcp+reg9901zkyT3fDW/iv JVv6pWtkh6Pw2ytZT7mvg7YhX3V50Nv860cV11mocUVcqBLv0gcT+HBDYtbuvexNftwNQKD5193A 7zN4vG7CTYkXxytSjKuXrpEatEiFPxWgb84nVj25SU5q/r1Xhwby6mLhkbaXslkVtwEWT3Van49r KjlK4XrUKYYWtnfzq6aSak5u0Vpxd1rY79tWhD3EdCvOhNz/QplNa+VkIsrcp7+8ZhP1l1b2U6Ma xIVteuVMD3X0vziIwr7jxYae9FZjbxlpUemqXjcC0QaFfN7qI0JsQMALL7iGRBg7K0CoOBzECdD3 fuZil5kU/LP9cr1BK31U0Uy651bFnAMMMkqhAChIbn0ei72VnbpSsrrSdF0BAGYQ8vyHae5aCg+H 75dVCV33K6FuxZrf09yTz+Vx/PkdRUYkXmZz/OTfyJXsUOUXrym6KvI2rYpccSk5MIIHtTCCBp2g AwIBAgICHlwwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENv bSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYD VQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTAeFw0x MjAzMTgwNDMyNDhaFw0xNDAzMTkxMTA3MzJaMIGbMRkwFwYDVQQNExBHclRNNkxTN1gzNTc3OHM5 MQswCQYDVQQGEwJDTDEiMCAGA1UECBMZTWV0cm9wb2xpdGFuYSBkZSBTYW50aWFnbzEWMBQGA1UE BxMNSXNsYSBkZSBNYWlwbzEVMBMGA1UEAxMMSm9obiBCcmFkbGV5MR4wHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFg9q YnJhZGxleUBtZS5jb20wggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQCySuUEj3esFMs5 AZLAhPpyjp0DD+vAM+tFeXr8XahzgoOf5A3oJ0V4ejTwfzjpUlL0IOMsq+cr2NvHGzjBip6cp09v eODO3yhztv1le1aQ6CzGAx/p0Fn8g+biVYGkJtKvex4MYNcSmITaVNleejtzbk6C5HgTpBqFykcA FmN4RYrrmYwfbmCahF/kxjWTeq67nL4UJgIcTaLBTmPOr6YjceYbn35QwUvHV+NX7NOyVHDbpxAM L+56nCN5hKnxLbqF9aKlVbBCPiOz8LtGg+2+3aLJ5T4tIfzWMbjCUBae2I4bVa2hdS5dZJwTGFyI p4pYKd6bL2qqbFF8moFE54aVAgMBAAGjggQOMIIECjAJBgNVHRMEAjAAMAsGA1UdDwQEAwIEsDAd BgNVHSUEFjAUBggrBgEFBQcDAgYIKwYBBQUHAwQwHQYDVR0OBBYEFD8Dv8LEoSfOmqZmUvP2JpAz Lbh5MB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFK5Vg2/sMcq59x36r2sx88gd46y7MH4GA1UdEQR3MHWBD2picmFkbGV5 QG1lLmNvbYEPamJyYWRsZXlAbWUuY29tgRBqYnJhZGxleUBtYWMuY29tgRF2ZTdqdGJAdmU3anRi LmNvbYETamJyYWRsZXlAd2luZ2FhLmNvbYEXam9obi5icmFkbGV5QHdpbmdhYS5jb20wggIhBgNV HSAEggIYMIICFDCCAhAGCysGAQQBgbU3AQICMIIB/zAuBggrBgEFBQcCARYiaHR0cDovL3d3dy5z dGFydHNzbC5jb20vcG9saWN5LnBkZjA0BggrBgEFBQcCARYoaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5j b20vaW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjCB9wYIKwYBBQUHAgIwgeowJxYgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNh dGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwAwIBARqBvlRoaXMgY2VydGlmaWNhdGUgd2FzIGlzc3VlZCBhY2NvcmRp bmcgdG8gdGhlIENsYXNzIDIgVmFsaWRhdGlvbiByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29t IENBIHBvbGljeSwgcmVsaWFuY2Ugb25seSBmb3IgdGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHB1cnBvc2UgaW4gY29t cGxpYW5jZSBvZiB0aGUgcmVseWluZyBwYXJ0eSBvYmxpZ2F0aW9ucy4wgZwGCCsGAQUFBwICMIGP MCcWIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MAMCAQIaZExpYWJpbGl0eSBhbmQg d2FycmFudGllcyBhcmUgbGltaXRlZCEgU2VlIHNlY3Rpb24gIkxlZ2FsIGFuZCBMaW1pdGF0aW9u cyIgb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENBIHBvbGljeS4wNgYDVR0fBC8wLTAroCmgJ4YlaHR0cDovL2Ny bC5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vY3J0dTItY3JsLmNybDCBjgYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgYEwfzA5BggrBgEFBQcw AYYtaHR0cDovL29jc3Auc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3N1Yi9jbGFzczIvY2xpZW50L2NhMEIGCCsGAQUF BzAChjZodHRwOi8vYWlhLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jZXJ0cy9zdWIuY2xhc3MyLmNsaWVudC5jYS5j cnQwIwYDVR0SBBwwGoYYaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IB AQARx8Pg+Yetf5bfNo/8qxHiDAsAvRRNozPXhIieDpr0XeRvxkNtNSd5L25uCmp4lA/YgVzRTmBC cndd4Ifqn0jzya+bU2opDDxa9+CVLRohLX29+lOBclI90g7Ykk9GpoG1d/fOR1cnByRf3900yssZ 4a9oVP19Q11B0dTgEjWlVSmAqvv3pPstNz8RF8fyIWnX4KZ1WQnpjaIl1ZSniHXteZvFshPQJ1Lh JKT9VbwsWyf+ZXPqEHvdW2HCMawiS7nhanilG6rUpf6kBOdGTekdFrXPebEkyars4RcQ1wJWb5sC fJSthtSKU1L1RVNhLz/d1WwqI26kFo5k7686AmpUMYIDbDCCA2gCAQEwgZMwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYT AklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0 aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJt ZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQQICHlwwCQYFKw4DAhoFAKCCAa0wGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3 DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNMTMwNzA4MjAzNjQyWjAjBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxFgQUYpJNrW52 Opco8xmQju57d785rQYwgaQGCSsGAQQBgjcQBDGBljCBkzCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNV BAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNp Z25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMTL1N0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDIgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUgQ2xp ZW50IENBAgIeXDCBpgYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAgsxgZaggZMwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQK Ew1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWdu aW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVu dCBDQQICHlwwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAEggEARM4JNOI36Wb5wXd2vovuw5GCkTRw7f+246PQiAtn RN/hy0CwnU2Y6E48wkqgMXXIHQ8mRncUg2t94T6ABYEyauhaJlOJlSp91GvBCNZiNJ2cTWHdLXTm WZwyU8OLHA37piu4mc2z9S1P+qPzKdmuHO3CI/4u0YUJRmr9AVHcQcBHMKpLmis0pg1jxamZ4MyS ac5iSzyNyUuLwly7eOE3mDW2TBe6DXzgi/g+4ppXYPLkIlUvGsxNgaFv/1+JoZkMXyUSrmZVXnbd LO1asjsK1cYprBQo/azXZ/Q32cNAhYiMBtZFZ2vYOullef0AgiEL9/NjJfDMY6JQTGID3A9/owAA AAAAAA== --Apple-Mail=_ADBEEF84-C56B-4249-9CF8-9E4A4E8349D8-- From bortzmeyer@nic.fr Mon Jul 8 13:43:08 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DB4C21F9DFB for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:43:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Be5FzVi8PUsU for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:43:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.bortzmeyer.org (aetius.bortzmeyer.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fece:1902]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC6F021F9DF1 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:43:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 539423B5B6; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 20:43:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A9072C9AFC; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 22:41:35 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 22:41:35 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: webfinger@ietf.org Message-ID: <20130708204135.GB30054@sources.org> References: <044501cddece$fd045040$f70cf0c0$@packetizer.com> <048401cdded8$605d6c90$211845b0$@packetizer.com> <04c701cddedc$3f996000$becc2000$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <04c701cddedc$3f996000$becc2000$@packetizer.com> X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 7.1 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [webfinger] Server Response language X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 20:43:08 -0000 On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 01:02:59PM -0500, Paul E. Jones wrote a message of 383 lines which said: > But there server did find something. It found the "webfinger" > resource. The software that responds to the query has to then > decided what it returns. It might be logical to some, but I'd argue > we need to state this to avoid confusion. It seems that this thread died without a conclusion? I see nothing in -15 about the server's return code (all examples are success, with a 200 code). Tim Bray claimed that it should simply follow the standard rules of HTTP but, as far as I know, there are no standard rules when /.well-known/webfinger is found *but* the resource is not. 200? 401? 404? GET /.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct%3ADOESNOTEXIST%40example.com HTTP/1.1 From stpeter@stpeter.im Mon Jul 8 13:44:26 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0D9421F9E12 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:44:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.537 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.537 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.062, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dmziXl5fX8Fz for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:44:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DC4221F9DFF for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:44:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ergon.local (unknown [128.107.239.233]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4F990413B8; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 14:45:21 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <51DB24A2.9020203@stpeter.im> Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 14:44:18 -0600 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Bradley References: <51DABAC6.4090305@doit.wisc.edu> <51DB170A.9070400@stpeter.im> <123e94cf-ce7b-4c38-805e-e18ce0025d5e@email.android.com> <51DB1B37.9010007@stpeter.im> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 20:44:27 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 7/8/13 2:36 PM, John Bradley wrote: > In Sec 4.2 WF currently allows redirecting requests from a https: > uri to another https: uri. > > The problem is mostly domains that don't have any sort of secure > web hosting to redirect from. Well, if you don't have secure web hosting in the first place, secure delegation via HTTP is going to be a problem, eh? ;-) I don't see that there's anything we can do about that, other than warn of the potential dangers. Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJR2ySiAAoJEOoGpJErxa2pcvIP/2GgFnRyHqujP4lKm+B1A8K4 w8WZXL+6/ISNuEQ0X0Aa8PN75BySbTCLzWW8jn03UGxLH2Lgl3pLsx98E6LhRcJP 5JZ9m6QVIWpFyZ9HM6a67tg3ioIJcxUjvgXvvNFDGHHBxUvsloGejuSZ5QcTpCOD FpXIUZLrnWaFpKF7yqdbsKw+j7lA85oL3a2LXK5al+6S/rM22AUo4yCScR16CP2b 7pVtVbGRLse5iWK13nOBb/hqETaigK2xsgqZnB69yEce2WZPn6M7OmkeT0ZlYl05 dkJ2SaC6r7qXbJ1LbrwE/TYaFT5sNSQlPbqfSGksnVAlEheAF+y8puGZDxOT9vqg UR63J1yXVm+tKKXyuVz1+1j5qVwQWDhm6V92+8iHUUb1DfF2wRdswR0n3BKUnR6X 54Ql25rJObuINoPwAPIxNnSnDrRrDn3IHmnpYn2DNpYpdDE5PnqWSMSo33WEMic/ YRgRdoRsiqO8ZjRTwU1kqgYeZXejAigsS8Td9Al3bF5UjbxkhAHdPos8haQbBTug MbeYaBQiIB2sadmQ+yZufmfO2apQ0unDk9r/HsG2qlorX7k60Pfxs4SspZ1wFvnl J0HDPJy72fYfGwqCuSYO26Q1ZVDmiAa4tPi6zYY5ZXE4sIul9UAeQcwTZ/lGRADg rEqTGchmFBK4a8KHSaCe =aTbl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From paulej@packetizer.com Mon Jul 8 13:57:50 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1633B21F9E18 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:57:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Zo7jg+xfLRYp for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:57:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75DA821F9CAB for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:57:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r68KvELK020575 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 8 Jul 2013 16:57:15 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1373317035; bh=m3GhRH7fstfhzZiI+oba0QsdMgrAWKP48YKrtsT9CoA=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=fXf/rGQ0Y2W0HnzmUxNhQJHIbhrY+DpeGmNKzA9YDorgBKuo7obdSsX89ZhIZSdhf oD5Y6np8t0A6iUyIa9J4o1bORl6niYtb0/ujqg8TDWUipIgZMKmSZw1oP23ozhFU7h McJv4J02ofODYNz/OBINMHgGPQOcW53nxKfDME8c= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Stephane Bortzmeyer'" References: <0a8601ce7870$2ceef090$86ccd1b0$@packetizer.com> <20130708202625.GA30054@sources.org> In-Reply-To: <20130708202625.GA30054@sources.org> Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 16:57:18 -0400 Message-ID: <031001ce7c1d$bbd271f0$337755d0$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQK+xgiCySGmeoDt4xMNPiAxDqNw4QGl3zfVl21/WvA= Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Revised WebFinger spec (draft -15) X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 20:57:50 -0000 Stephane, > Editorial note: > > > suppose a mail client was configured to automatically perform a > > WebFinger query as discussed in the example in Section 3.1. > > Should probably be deleted since it refers to an example which no > longer exists. Should we delete the entire paragraph or just the words "as discussed in the example in Section 3.1". I would assume the words of caution related to automated processing might still be appreciated. I also noted in section 4.3, there is a reference to a deleted example, too. This smaller example seems it is OK, but I'll remove the reference and cleanup the text a little. Paul From wnorris@gmail.com Mon Jul 8 14:27:44 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90CB321F9DF1 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 14:27:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9sCrwqUfCGBw for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 14:27:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-we0-x233.google.com (mail-we0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9188F21F9C2D for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 14:27:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-we0-f179.google.com with SMTP id w59so4075852wes.38 for ; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 14:27:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=Kf8bH1NGlF5imHQ0GDQlM/fYnZskdDr/lch3GnUGS1s=; b=MQkybI4RejwoIh4RcgvINR0OUP/7cOj0qxBIzuKWZLxhuu8CIztn+z3xhNN2iTx6Nx vz2A+AvTFHBUL7vrhnDJzhQE34ftgJgbzGaaT4x0w/OIzD+wECZDDniuJEM4DmD3y7li cFR1s4FsJjijA2C2ahgc8e4Xf1z6GM37lL6R6+TjTfovWdmTEe9Fb+MHg1LE4VNy3AID 7vWqDm54ag3q6GBmnU9CRp/23uM2bglfF1aWRz6yOwVt18FgkosA6nTsHx4gb8ovxsXP 4O1scpxImapdR1vnVoqIddrU2mX2BGt67p8UNuXfkjG0eGtYfO3UnWzZlzpsVJ/18//+ Slqw== X-Received: by 10.180.189.5 with SMTP id ge5mr877450wic.48.1373318862509; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 14:27:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: wnorris@gmail.com Received: by 10.195.12.202 with HTTP; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 14:27:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130708204135.GB30054@sources.org> References: <044501cddece$fd045040$f70cf0c0$@packetizer.com> <048401cdded8$605d6c90$211845b0$@packetizer.com> <04c701cddedc$3f996000$becc2000$@packetizer.com> <20130708204135.GB30054@sources.org> From: Will Norris Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 14:27:12 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: OQqt-2G78wSjJQZzOTYsmR8NBfk Message-ID: To: Stephane Bortzmeyer Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2239af69ea604e106b60b Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Server Response language X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 21:27:44 -0000 --001a11c2239af69ea604e106b60b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 In a webfinger query, the HTTP resource being requested is the full "/.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:user@domain.com". If the host doesn't have any metadata for "acct:user@domain.com", what else would they return, aside from a 404? I agree with Tim that simply referencing HTTP should be sufficient here. On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 01:02:59PM -0500, > Paul E. Jones wrote > a message of 383 lines which said: > > > But there server did find something. It found the "webfinger" > > resource. > But that wasn't the HTTP resource that was requested (unless of course you *actually* requested just "/.well-known/webfinger"). Section 3.4 of rfc3986 makes it clear that the query string is part of the resource identifier (as opposed to rfc2396 which left it somewhat ambiguous) > The software that responds to the query has to then > > decided what it returns. It might be logical to some, but I'd argue > > we need to state this to avoid confusion. > > It seems that this thread died without a conclusion? I see nothing in > -15 about the server's return code (all examples are success, with a > 200 code). Tim Bray claimed that it should simply follow the standard > rules of HTTP but, as far as I know, there are no standard rules when > /.well-known/webfinger is found *but* the resource is not. 200? 401? > 404? > > GET /.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct%3ADOESNOTEXIST%40example.comHTTP/1.1 > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > --001a11c2239af69ea604e106b60b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a webfinger query, the HTTP resource being requested is= the full "/.well-known/webfinger?resource=3Dacct:user@domain.com". =A0If the host doesn't= have any metadata for "acct= :user@domain.com", what else would they return, aside from a 404? = =A0I agree with Tim that simply referencing HTTP should be sufficient here.=

On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer <= bortzmeyer@nic.fr> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 01:02:59PM -0500,
=A0Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote
=A0a message of 383 lines which said:

> But there server did find something. =A0It found the "webfinger&q= uot;
> resource. =A0

But that was= n't the HTTP resource that was requested (unless of course you *actuall= y* requested just "/.well-known/webfinger"). =A0Section 3.4 of rf= c3986 makes it clear that the query string is part of the resource identifi= er (as opposed to rfc2396 which left it somewhat ambiguous)
=A0
The software= that responds to the query has to then
> decided what it returns. =A0It might be logical to some, but I'd a= rgue
> we need to state this to avoid confusion.

It seems that this thread died without a conclusion? I see nothing in=
-15 about the server's return code (all examples are success, with a 200 code). Tim Bray claimed that it should simply follow the standard
rules of HTTP but, as far as I know, there are no standard rules when
/.well-known/webfinger is found *but* the resource is not. 200? 401?
404?

GET /.well-known/webfinger?resource=3Dacct%3ADOESNOTEXIST%40example.com HTTP/1.1

_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

--001a11c2239af69ea604e106b60b-- From paulej@packetizer.com Mon Jul 8 21:03:48 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 476C511E8113 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 21:03:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p2tiG6tAHbfc for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 21:03:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D974711E811B for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 21:03:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6943hx3015967 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 9 Jul 2013 00:03:43 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1373342623; bh=zBdDYQCPe5m9J3eGM6VXeg0c3q9LmwGqUy6ve9+qNho=; h=From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=Tmq4CZ74kuFTeHV6tKuwR2Ffa2INec+vAfaerWBo8IkY8yCXmGV868/D1vzlIMgfB aQiPhA1Os0lh9UJcVFDWDN7ubHSo0IuC4gR6XpLOFUow95W36AbSJ1xLcWLs0tFGRO MwRKkRN7xiazQWDJxAUrrCLEfq31yJloCCFPtTBM= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Stephane Bortzmeyer'" , References: <044501cddece$fd045040$f70cf0c0$@packetizer.com> <048401cdded8$605d6c90$211845b0$@packetizer.com> <04c701cddedc$3f996000$becc2000$@packetizer.com> <20130708204135.GB30054@sources.org> In-Reply-To: <20130708204135.GB30054@sources.org> Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 00:03:46 -0400 Message-ID: <035e01ce7c59$4fd2ed40$ef78c7c0$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQH37xPjZJRUcIsUNQeBWhT/3tk+XwJBmtyyAWDszUcCCDXr2gDoDW8xAqVlvXCYvu7VYA== Subject: Re: [webfinger] Server Response language X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 04:03:48 -0000 Stephane, We used to have explicit language in the document to cover this. Somehow, part of it got removed and I do not recall why. If there is an error, we still have text that effectively says ... Up until the -07 version, we had this paragraph: If the client queries the WebFinger server and provides a URI for which the server has no information, the server MUST return a 404 status code. This was in the section "Performing a WebFinger Query". Some of the language changed in that section, but this behavior should not be lost. Should we re-introduce this intent with a paragraph like this? If the "resource" parameter is a value for which the server has no information, the server MUST indicate that it was unable to match the request as per Section 10.4.5 of RFC 2616. This allows the use of 404 or 410, as appropriate. I think that is the right thing to do. I would suggest we do that and also suggest breaking the last sentence from the first paragraph from section 4.2 so that it is its own paragraph: If the "resource" parameter is absent or malformed, the WebFinger resource MUST indicate that the request is bad as per Section 10.4.1 of RFC 2616 [2]. I would then place the above paragraph after this one. Paul > -----Original Message----- > From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Stephane Bortzmeyer > Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 4:42 PM > To: webfinger@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [webfinger] Server Response language > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 01:02:59PM -0500, > Paul E. Jones wrote > a message of 383 lines which said: > > > But there server did find something. It found the "webfinger" > > resource. The software that responds to the query has to then > > decided what it returns. It might be logical to some, but I'd argue > > we need to state this to avoid confusion. > > It seems that this thread died without a conclusion? I see nothing in > -15 about the server's return code (all examples are success, with a > 200 code). Tim Bray claimed that it should simply follow the standard > rules of HTTP but, as far as I know, there are no standard rules when > /.well-known/webfinger is found *but* the resource is not. 200? 401? > 404? > > GET /.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct%3ADOESNOTEXIST%40example.com > HTTP/1.1 > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger From paulej@packetizer.com Mon Jul 8 21:24:47 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D22B521F9BA6 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 21:24:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A-J6que7Ico9 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 21:24:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F31A621F9B9C for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2013 21:24:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r694OVtK017261 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 9 Jul 2013 00:24:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1373343873; bh=SNspGitcyQ/BdBsSpwYvbwF5T/oviuEnc8CDIz3wkwU=; h=From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=nTBJrcWCbxFlQJuV0bq3kVzL4v4CssACAQsuU8M2xqlgj4e9hZu56hz3ioiCPuR8f IZd7KLZ1uObIWIlZ3/Ske+RLUSQNVcm9xxFTzUFuaaPZrlGgD9kb1n3TJtYvodisCf Xfwr8ETMdXcTPLf4SwlyJylrNEG7Oe2G0MxqslVI= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Cyrus Daboo'" , References: In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 00:24:35 -0400 Message-ID: <036001ce7c5c$38d87b70$aa897250$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQNMTePL77yC9mRw9jaL/5G+2vzIp5ZgGVVw Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 04:24:47 -0000 Cyrus, I had a quick look over the new draft. I do think it's good that this will utilize WebFinger in order to retrieve service discovery information. I am curious about one thing. When issuing a query to the WF server, the server returns a link relation of type "service-configuration". The associated URL in the Appendix B example is "https://example.com/service-config". Since the response from the WF server is for a specific identifier (user), I believe this URL should point directly to the service config document for the user. For example, what I would expect the example in Appendix B to look like would be this (changed line denoted with !): { "subject" : "acct:cyrus@example.com", "links" : [ { "rel" : "service-configuration", "type" : "application/json", ! "href" : "https://example.com/service-config?id=cyrus@example.com" } ] } Or perhaps like: { "subject" : "acct:cyrus@example.com", "links" : [ { "rel" : "service-configuration", "type" : "application/json", ! "href" : "https://example.com/service-config/cyrus.json" } ] } I believe for all examples we've considered with WF so far, there was no need for the client to perform any manipulation on the URI for the specific link relation. The examples in this document are the first to do that. Is there a reason? Can I persuade you to put the user-specific URL right into the WebFinger response? Paul > -----Original Message----- > From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Cyrus Daboo > Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 10:17 AM > To: webfinger@ietf.org > Subject: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger > > Hi folks, > I have recently posted a new version of the Automated Service > Configuration > draft (formerly known as Aggregated Service Discovery): > discovery/>. > > This protocol now makes use of webfinger to "bootstrap" discovery of the > config document. Hopefully it will serve as a useful example of how > webfinger can be used by specific applications. I would appreciate > feedback > from the webfinger community on how we have gone about using webfinger, > thanks. > > -- > Cyrus Daboo > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger From markus.lanthaler@gmx.net Tue Jul 9 02:12:46 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84EDF21F9C96 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 02:12:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.81 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.81 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT=1.449, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F6ythMdxs3Lq for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 02:12:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AA0021F9D35 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 02:12:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Vostro3500 ([77.116.247.55]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MEccf-1UyQzk3mdV-00Fhhx for ; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 11:12:38 +0200 From: "Markus Lanthaler" To: References: <036001ce7c5c$38d87b70$aa897250$@packetizer.com> In-Reply-To: <036001ce7c5c$38d87b70$aa897250$@packetizer.com> Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 11:12:33 +0200 Message-ID: <012301ce7c84$73e66790$5bb336b0$@lanthaler@gmx.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Content-Language: de Thread-Index: AQNMTePL77yC9mRw9jaL/5G+2vzIp5ZgGVVwgABS70A= X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:uXMLT22OIgqX8GYTcggPt7Dcf4eJPtCA3ZAa3K84CEasNBq1WWQ OBL8HvFpFIVmPY3AV9cZkOxL70ISQX8yPEKbyiAAxOcnqpOoaDGgn6IXe2rMCMydERR65ir 3pheTKIR5QHV7q915wkXGRd9tlAXrZudtxP17m40S+s9oM1+NTaaG5DmqYYHJTRpWEShi7H JTp/5yPDeZhw/e/FWuWgQ== Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 09:12:46 -0000 On Tuesday, July 09, 2013 6:25 AM, Paul E. Jones wrote: > Cyrus, > > I had a quick look over the new draft. I do think it's good that this will > utilize WebFinger in order to retrieve service discovery information. > > I am curious about one thing. When issuing a query to the WF server, the > server returns a link relation of type "service-configuration". The > associated URL in the Appendix B example is > "https://example.com/service-config". Since the response from the WF server > is for a specific identifier (user), I believe this URL should point > directly to the service config document for the user. > [...] > > I believe for all examples we've considered with WF so far, there was no > need for the client to perform any manipulation on the URI for the specific > link relation. The examples in this document are the first to do that. Is > there a reason? Can I persuade you to put the user-specific URL right > into the WebFinger response? I think doing the opposite to make it consistent might be better. The service-configuration document doesn't contain any information depending on the user. So, returning *and* requesting https://example.com/service-config would be better in my opinion. -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler From cyrus@daboo.name Tue Jul 9 06:46:03 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8D7621F90E4 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 06:46:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8h-2Got08tfR for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 06:45:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [173.13.55.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD13121F9256 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 06:45:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B2BD46DBF0C; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:45:57 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at example.com Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (daboo.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tnxXJVnNoeFJ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:45:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from caldav.corp.apple.com (unknown [17.45.162.46]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0D2BC46DBF01; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:45:55 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 09:45:52 -0400 From: Cyrus Daboo To: Markus Lanthaler , webfinger@ietf.org Message-ID: <6C0A49BE5C62E974B45DDED3@caldav.corp.apple.com> In-Reply-To: <012301ce7c84$73e66790$5bb336b0$@lanthaler@gmx.net> References: <036001ce7c5c$38d87b70$aa897250$@packetizer.com> <012301ce7c84$73e66790$5bb336b0$@lanthaler@gmx.net> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; size=897 Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 13:46:03 -0000 Hi Markus, --On July 9, 2013 at 11:12:33 AM +0200 Markus Lanthaler wrote: > I think doing the opposite to make it consistent might be better. The > service-configuration document doesn't contain any information depending > on the user. So, returning *and* requesting > https://example.com/service-config would be better in my opinion. That is not true in general, and I will try and add an example to the spec to illustrate that. e.g., some users may be given access to a service that other users do not have (and should not see at all) - perhaps some services are "for-pay" and the user hasn't signed up yet. Another aspect we have not addressed is the possibility that the user id used to login to the advertised services may be different from the id typed in to to discovery - so those id's ought to be in the service config document too. -- Cyrus Daboo From cyrus@daboo.name Tue Jul 9 06:51:49 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED10E21F9CE8; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 06:51:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9LcrS9W-HKxH; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 06:51:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [173.13.55.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E03DE21F99FE; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 06:51:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15B0F46DC1F8; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:51:41 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at example.com Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (daboo.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R2e-m6KD6yx6; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:51:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from caldav.corp.apple.com (unknown [17.45.162.46]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9D53B46DC1ED; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:51:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 09:51:36 -0400 From: Cyrus Daboo To: Markus Lanthaler Message-ID: <269D10E96ABEE65AF92AB85A@caldav.corp.apple.com> In-Reply-To: <012901ce798f$b9c87750$2d5965f0$@lanthaler@gmx.net> References: <012901ce798f$b9c87750$2d5965f0$@lanthaler@gmx.net> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; size=660 Cc: webfinger@ietf.org, apps-discuss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 13:51:49 -0000 Hi Markus, --On July 5, 2013 at 4:55:34 PM +0200 Markus Lanthaler wrote: > > Looks good to me. The only thing that bugs me is that the " Automated > Service Configuration Document Format" you define doesn't have its own > media type. That will make it impossible to reuse in other scenarios and > ambiguous how to process the target of a service-configuration link > because other people may start using their own JSON flavors. I would > suggest to define a media type or at list a profile URI to make this > unambiguous. > Agreed - I think that makes sense - I will add that to the next revision of the spec. -- Cyrus Daboo From cyrus@daboo.name Tue Jul 9 06:54:42 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4646711E8111 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 06:54:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ty+LGZmhozgl for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 06:54:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [173.13.55.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A3A411E812A for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 06:54:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 024E146DC26F; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:54:16 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at example.com Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (daboo.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 34LnIgcb7ZaK; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:54:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from caldav.corp.apple.com (unknown [17.45.162.46]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8FAD846DC264; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:54:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 09:54:11 -0400 From: Cyrus Daboo To: "Paul E. Jones" , webfinger@ietf.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <036001ce7c5c$38d87b70$aa897250$@packetizer.com> References: <036001ce7c5c$38d87b70$aa897250$@packetizer.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; size=1181 Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 13:54:42 -0000 Hi Paul, --On July 9, 2013 at 12:24:35 AM -0400 "Paul E. Jones" wrote: > I believe for all examples we've considered with WF so far, there was no > need for the client to perform any manipulation on the URI for the > specific link relation. The examples in this document are the first to > do that. Is there a reason? Can I persuade you to put the user-specific > URL right into the WebFinger response? Yes, that seems like a better approach. One question that has come up is whether webfinger should be the only HTTP service config document discovery mechanism. One suggestion has been to have a separate .well-known resource for direct access to the document. My feeling is that at this point I think we should stick solely with webfinger - partly to help promote use of webfinger itself, but also because there might be a whole bunch of other useful information that webfinger could provide. e.g. the service config client might also want to get the user's vCard in addition to service information and that could be accomplished in a single webfinger lookup. I will try adding an example to the spec to illustrate that. -- Cyrus Daboo From markus.lanthaler@gmx.net Tue Jul 9 07:00:32 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6247F21F9AF0 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 07:00:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.15 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.15 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT=1.449] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kgGbnYYzOTfq for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 07:00:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9EAB21F84B4 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 07:00:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Vostro3500 ([178.115.250.27]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Li1hG-1USSZA3BVS-00n6mn; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 16:00:07 +0200 From: "Markus Lanthaler" To: "'Cyrus Daboo'" , References: <036001ce7c5c$38d87b70$aa897250$@packetizer.com> <012301ce7c84$73e66790$5bb336b0$@lanthaler@gmx.net> <6C0A49BE5C62E974B45DDED3@caldav.corp.apple.com> In-Reply-To: <6C0A49BE5C62E974B45DDED3@caldav.corp.apple.com> Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 16:00:02 +0200 Message-ID: <018601ce7cac$9d54c2c0$d7fe4840$@lanthaler@gmx.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Content-Language: de Thread-Index: Ac58qql6ZlVoiLuUTZGFXbR1NYBxHQAARzBA X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:bRZznzxqjtE8hwvLEdYW5DqxCTrjHM6mTBLf76QbE9Bcnbp0mgL 3HV6L+2V2utbp/Tp50LVeItystuHXi7teTNJGoGG2p7ovBj5Z98bXF2EUiYVE7EWzLuuFOL LeUyVY/c6c/SKdiKAmAglkX/F1nVNafSAbZrRcl9bd0TIvVeWUf7OajrRqGISkle5NqPHJM jpjVDEm+mvH3ZkJm7CW/A== Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 14:00:33 -0000 On Tuesday, July 09, 2013 3:46 PM, Cyrus Daboo wrote: > Hi Markus, > > --On July 9, 2013 at 11:12:33 AM +0200 Markus Lanthaler wrote: > > > I think doing the opposite to make it consistent might be better. The > > service-configuration document doesn't contain any information depending > > on the user. So, returning *and* requesting > > https://example.com/service-config would be better in my opinion. > > That is not true in general, and I will try and add an example to the spec > to illustrate that. e.g., some users may be given access to a service that > other users do not have (and should not see at all) - perhaps some services > are "for-pay" and the user hasn't signed up yet. I wasn't generalizing but talking specifically about the examples in the current draft. > Another aspect we have not addressed is the possibility that the user id > used to login to the advertised services may be different from the id typed > in to to discovery - so those id's ought to be in the service config > document too. True, but that should be a separate example. The best would be to describe both mechanisms and, in the case the "id" query parameter is required, it should be included directly in service-configuration URL in the WebFinger response as Paul noted. -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler From gsalguei@cisco.com Tue Jul 9 09:34:03 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4768221F9E94 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:34:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.339 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.339 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.260, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pr2FmzA3NGg8 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:33:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from av-tac-rtp.cisco.com (av-tac-rtp.cisco.com [64.102.19.209]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4963C21F9DB4 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:33:57 -0700 (PDT) X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned Received: from chook.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-rtp.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r69GXuwK006011 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 12:33:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dhcp-64-102-154-205.cisco.com (dhcp-64-102-154-205.cisco.com [64.102.154.205]) by chook.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r69GXt8u015054; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 12:33:55 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) From: Gonzalo Salgueiro In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 12:33:55 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <036001ce7c5c$38d87b70$aa897250$@packetizer.com> To: Cyrus Daboo X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) Cc: Paul Jones , webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 16:34:03 -0000 On Jul 9, 2013, at 9:54 AM, Cyrus Daboo wrote: > Hi Paul, >=20 > --On July 9, 2013 at 12:24:35 AM -0400 "Paul E. Jones" = wrote: >=20 >> I believe for all examples we've considered with WF so far, there was = no >> need for the client to perform any manipulation on the URI for the >> specific link relation. The examples in this document are the first = to >> do that. Is there a reason? Can I persuade you to put the = user-specific >> URL right into the WebFinger response? >=20 > Yes, that seems like a better approach. Agreed. >=20 > One question that has come up is whether webfinger should be the only = HTTP service config document discovery mechanism. One suggestion has = been to have a separate .well-known resource for direct access to the = document. My feeling is that at this point I think we should stick = solely with webfinger - partly to help promote use of webfinger itself, = but also because there might be a whole bunch of other useful = information that webfinger could provide. e.g. the service config client = might also want to get the user's vCard in addition to service = information and that could be accomplished in a single webfinger lookup. = I will try adding an example to the spec to illustrate that. An example would help. In this case, Webfinger's flexibility to discover = info of any kind is a big advantage and should be highlighted. Our = experiences with Webfinger dictate that simplicity is key to widespread = adoption, so IMO restricting to just Webfinger as a discovery framework = seems more implementation-friendly. =20 Thanks for the updates to the doc. It is looking much better. --G >=20 > --=20 > Cyrus Daboo >=20 > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >=20 From jesse.thompson@doit.wisc.edu Tue Jul 9 13:47:15 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A01F21F9D67 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 13:47:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DMoMwE2qLeWN for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 13:47:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpauth4.wiscmail.wisc.edu (wmauth4.doit.wisc.edu [144.92.197.145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8E4F21F9D79 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 13:47:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed Received: from avs-daemon.smtpauth4.wiscmail.wisc.edu by smtpauth4.wiscmail.wisc.edu (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.01(7.0.4.27.0) 64bit (built Aug 30 2012)) id <0MPO00900S4VJ000@smtpauth4.wiscmail.wisc.edu> for webfinger@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 15:47:08 -0500 (CDT) X-Spam-PmxInfo: Server=avs-4, Version=6.0.2.2308539, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2013.7.9.203916, SenderIP=0.0.0.0 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (boson.doit.wisc.edu [128.104.17.84]) by smtpauth4.wiscmail.wisc.edu (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.01(7.0.4.27.0) 64bit (built Aug 30 2012)) with ESMTPSA id <0MPO004HLSEJ7V10@smtpauth4.wiscmail.wisc.edu>; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 15:47:08 -0500 (CDT) Message-id: <51DC76C9.5030905@doit.wisc.edu> Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 15:47:05 -0500 From: Jesse Thompson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 To: Peter Saint-Andre References: <51DABAC6.4090305@doit.wisc.edu> <51DB170A.9070400@stpeter.im> <123e94cf-ce7b-4c38-805e-e18ce0025d5e@email.android.com> <51DB1B37.9010007@stpeter.im> In-reply-to: <51DB1B37.9010007@stpeter.im> Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Automated Service Configuration now uses webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 20:47:15 -0000 On 7/8/2013 3:04 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 7/8/13 2:03 PM, Jesse Thompson wrote: >> >> >> Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> >> On 7/8/13 7:12 AM, Jesse Thompson wrote: >>>>> On 7/5/13 9:17 AM, Cyrus Daboo wrote: >>>>>> Hi folks, I have recently posted a new version of the Automated >>>>>> Service Configuration draft (formerly known as Aggregated Service >>>>>> Discovery): >>>>>> >> . >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >> This protocol now makes use of webfinger to "bootstrap" discovery of >> the >>>>>> config document. Hopefully it will serve as a useful example of >>>>>> how webfinger can be used by specific applications. I would >>>>>> appreciate feedback from the webfinger community on how we have >>>>>> gone about using webfinger, thanks. >>>>> >>>>> Since "the target FQDN is not in the queried domain" will apply to >>>>> the vast majority of email/calendar domains (hosted by Google, >>>>> Microsoft, etc): >>>>> >>>>> When it comes to practical implementation, essentially no clients >>>>> will bother to "verify with the user that the link URI target FQDN >>>>> is suitable for use before executing any connections to the host", >>>>> especially if they already have an auto-config scheme that doesn't >>>>> prompt the user (e.g. Thunderbird). >>>>> >>>>> It might be beneficial to the adoption of this standard to bake in >>>>> a method of secure delegation that could work from day one. >> >> Hi Jesse, do you have anything in mind? >> >> One option might be POSH: >> >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-posh/ >> >> However, if the original query to the service domain goes to an HTTPS >> URI, then following a redirect from there to an HTTPS URI at the >> target domain seems like a form of secure delegation to me. That's the >> same model that Matt Miller and I outline in the POSH draft. >> >> If I've misunderstood your comment, please do let me know. :-) >> >>> Yes, I was assuming that would be a good option. > > OK, so we might want some text about that, which probably could be > borrowed or adapted from the POSH document. My suggestion: " In the absence of a secure DNS option, clients MUST verify that the link URI target FQDN is suitable for use before executing any connections to the host as follows. 1. If the service domain supports it, verify the domain delegation chain of trust using POSH (PKIX Over Secure HTTP) as defined by [I-D.draft-miller-xmpp-posh-prooftype] 2. Require that the target FQDN returned in the link relation URI record exactly match the original service domain that was queried. 3. Prompt the user for manual confirmation of the trust relationship. Jesse From bortzmeyer@nic.fr Tue Jul 9 23:23:18 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F62421F9D96 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 23:23:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XUWTjoh3dXYb for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 23:23:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.bortzmeyer.org (aetius.bortzmeyer.org [217.70.190.232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49AE821F9E88 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 23:23:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id AC08B3B62D; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 06:23:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0F8E5199251; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 08:21:07 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 08:21:06 +0200 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Will Norris Message-ID: <20130710062106.GB15182@sources.org> References: <044501cddece$fd045040$f70cf0c0$@packetizer.com> <048401cdded8$605d6c90$211845b0$@packetizer.com> <04c701cddedc$3f996000$becc2000$@packetizer.com> <20130708204135.GB30054@sources.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 7.1 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Server Response language X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 06:23:18 -0000 On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 02:27:12PM -0700, Will Norris wrote a message of 103 lines which said: > In a webfinger query, the HTTP resource being requested is the full > "/.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:user@domain.com". If the host > doesn't have any metadata for "acct:user@domain.com", what else > would they return, aside from a 404? It is far from obvious to me. After all, does not return a 404, neither does I understand the difference with Webfinger (both search engines try to be helpful to humans and so produce some result explaining there was no match) but, IMHO, it is a sufficient reason to be explicit in the RFC. From bortzmeyer@nic.fr Tue Jul 9 23:23:19 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D93D21F9D96 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 23:23:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTTP_ESCAPED_HOST=0.134, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RMFmNA-uKKJf for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 23:23:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.bortzmeyer.org (aetius.bortzmeyer.org [217.70.190.232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4990B21F9E6B for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 23:23:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id A9DFE3B5FC; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 06:23:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A04A9199251; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 08:18:43 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 08:18:43 +0200 From: 'Stephane Bortzmeyer' To: "Paul E. Jones" Message-ID: <20130710061843.GA15182@sources.org> References: <044501cddece$fd045040$f70cf0c0$@packetizer.com> <048401cdded8$605d6c90$211845b0$@packetizer.com> <04c701cddedc$3f996000$becc2000$@packetizer.com> <20130708204135.GB30054@sources.org> <035e01ce7c59$4fd2ed40$ef78c7c0$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <035e01ce7c59$4fd2ed40$ef78c7c0$@packetizer.com> X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 7.1 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Server Response language X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 06:23:19 -0000 On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 12:03:46AM -0400, Paul E. Jones wrote a message of 64 lines which said: > If the "resource" parameter is a value for which the server has no > information, the server MUST indicate that it was unable to match > the request as per Section 10.4.5 of RFC 2616. > > This allows the use of 404 or 410, as appropriate. I think that is the > right thing to do. An aternative, if people insist that it is clear in RFC 3986 and that it should not be restated in Webfinger, is to provide an example: For instance, in the OpenID COnnect example, at the end of 3.1, add: And if the account does not exist: GET /.well-known/webfinger? resource=acct%3Adoesnotexist%40example.com& rel=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fconnect%2F1.0%2Fissuer HTTP/1.1 Host: example.com The server might respond like this: HTTP/1.1 404 Not found Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * Without a body. From paulej@packetizer.com Wed Jul 10 07:01:03 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADF0621F9F9A for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:01:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTTP_ESCAPED_HOST=0.134] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sX6aJcWebPV3 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:00:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E02EB21F9F9E for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:00:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6AE0u78015983 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:00:57 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1373464857; bh=X6HqDTeaXUo/MQBSe0M5svhkoVd99jLCezkmuMxyCLU=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=lR5Eid6WeKqB4LFmnGuskqUyR15g4nHqLmlouJYJsXRZ7fnX6s81x2Ylh3lIrEgQ0 mn6vccGu0FCn2e1U+nvSCNfesul0nBZKQJt+MJ674HnerTOm/8r+9cQypWnoMhEqri wwUedoZgMQwtwv+NtTcgj4IgVcun4cFGVB4dQjWc= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Stephane Bortzmeyer'" References: <044501cddece$fd045040$f70cf0c0$@packetizer.com> <048401cdded8$605d6c90$211845b0$@packetizer.com> <04c701cddedc$3f996000$becc2000$@packetizer.com> <20130708204135.GB30054@sources.org> <035e01ce7c59$4fd2ed40$ef78c7c0$@packetizer.com> <20130710061843.GA15182@sources.org> In-Reply-To: <20130710061843.GA15182@sources.org> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:01:00 -0400 Message-ID: <01f201ce7d75$e8f4b540$bade1fc0$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQH37xPjZJRUcIsUNQeBWhT/3tk+XwJBmtyyAWDszUcCCDXr2gDoDW8xAqVlvXABHUVasgDvwBZ0mLDi1iA= Content-Language: en-us Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Server Response language X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 14:01:03 -0000 Stephane, I believe anyone writing a web service should understand that proposed sentence. We could add it as part of an example, but that text is not normative. I believe it would be better to introduce a clear statement in section 4.2 similar to the way I worded it. Any suggested changes to the wording? Paul > -----Original Message----- > From: 'Stephane Bortzmeyer' [mailto:bortzmeyer@nic.fr] > Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 2:19 AM > To: Paul E. Jones > Cc: webfinger@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [webfinger] Server Response language > > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 12:03:46AM -0400, > Paul E. Jones wrote > a message of 64 lines which said: > > > If the "resource" parameter is a value for which the server has no > > information, the server MUST indicate that it was unable to match > > the request as per Section 10.4.5 of RFC 2616. > > > > This allows the use of 404 or 410, as appropriate. I think that is the > > right thing to do. > > An aternative, if people insist that it is clear in RFC 3986 and that > it should not be restated in Webfinger, is to provide an example: > > For instance, in the OpenID COnnect example, at the end of 3.1, add: > > And if the account does not exist: > > GET /.well-known/webfinger? > resource=acct%3Adoesnotexist%40example.com& > rel=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fconnect%2F1.0%2Fissuer > HTTP/1.1 > Host: example.com > > The server might respond like this: > > HTTP/1.1 404 Not found > Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * > > Without a body. From tbray@textuality.com Sun Jul 14 14:53:50 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F6DE21F8C93 for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 14:53:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ojknkRT2UPBl for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 14:53:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vc0-f182.google.com (mail-vc0-f182.google.com [209.85.220.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBCF121F9294 for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 14:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vc0-f182.google.com with SMTP id id13so8879103vcb.27 for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 14:53:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=SECU8oOoE9kNwIWAPv75m+uMUefyHQYfzNuUUvWtwX4=; b=ZSYHCaM6kMOm/7WBsMOkYrrDFjCC75HO8hYGGpH3D6RxtXpx1ExIjpWuB/ZCeT4/Kb jqpf6sK1TU56rj9cJmWNUCaRHojt5HbjO074Ok/pER7RR2zd6CprNuSPMk06IZ+JhGC9 cBiPAskf8JiK1dwBIKNKDafciBGUs7dHBLS/Gp3nK1RDpBG9NUzLX661mSvJV6PHEiaO 0J+i/L0nx+WjuyFvcM7Pdl8XL3FM5J/07MsjBLMAd/YvghTJrxh8PE3SJjS+d4rDfqw/ takb8G9c7nwEu1KOfR3woGhd9fqqCgsAYy0QRq1UYbIxLdqamwUuZF7NsyOG/Uk6Crn8 6YnA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.100.166 with SMTP id ez6mr23375130vdb.19.1373838821090; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 14:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.219.200 with HTTP; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 14:53:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [24.84.235.32] Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 14:53:41 -0700 Message-ID: From: Tim Bray To: "webfinger@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf307abcbbe8fa0704e17fc641 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnF0ovy//PkiSMm7PBC5ssQxl0RhOr1XRKlf7VUVxCenskj//RvjXgh9i/2wb7SNKnuk5MK Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 21:53:50 -0000 --20cf307abcbbe8fa0704e17fc641 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T --20cf307abcbbe8fa0704e17fc641 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addr= esses/domains to test JRD wrangling.=C2=A0 Suggestions? -T
--20cf307abcbbe8fa0704e17fc641-- From paulej@packetizer.com Sun Jul 14 19:07:03 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E9DC21F9C12 for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:07:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.849 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.740, BAYES_05=-1.11, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JGAc8wJlp00H for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:06:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BE7521F9C15 for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:06:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6F26uS8002304 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 14 Jul 2013 22:06:57 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1373854017; bh=iAy0mYOqTegZU3w/w6FuFKkBitynj0yUL/I/VVjo2lA=; h=From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=B+jC4TS5us69OiR88PKhRTArcODD0LUvWxTSYyeAHHSoNBobVaJKUGn70AkTAw65R 29qQpGuiDWRDMOcTRdpViN+UMyPvwLOqN96oBk1lfym5E2nRN/pSwrAJG8gM09XBhc fsCGBCqflQDRosUTJsbucsXWlvZmO7Z7uw0eHIpw= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Tim Bray'" , References: In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 22:07:02 -0400 Message-ID: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00D4_01CE80DE.78EC4C10" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQL/r+No/hn+Dxq4/2ORfMNzEE5vjpcCnmFA Content-Language: en-us Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 02:07:03 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00D4_01CE80DE.78EC4C10 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tim, =20 You=E2=80=99re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / = xmpp:=20 =20 Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but = it should be properly formatted. =20 I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the = acct: reply. I=E2=80=99m happy to throw something in if you want to = check a particular response. =20 Paul =20 From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf Of Tim Bray Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM To: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs =20 Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains = to test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T ------=_NextPart_000_00D4_01CE80DE.78EC4C10 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Tim,

 

You=E2=80=99re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / = acct: / xmpp:

 

Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), = but it should be properly formatted.

 

I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the = acct: reply.=C2=A0 I=E2=80=99m happy to throw something in if you want = to check a particular response.

 

Paul

 

From:= = webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf Of Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 = PM
To: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: [webfinger] = Looking for JRDs

 

Working = on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test = JRD wrangling.  Suggestions? = -T

------=_NextPart_000_00D4_01CE80DE.78EC4C10-- From konklone@gmail.com Sun Jul 14 19:13:14 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 312F621F9CD5 for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:13:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JL4c+c0Kat-D for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:13:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ob0-x231.google.com (mail-ob0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6258A21F99A8 for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:13:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ob0-f177.google.com with SMTP id ta17so13247218obb.22 for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:13:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=WbK/aE9RFfcHE6ofiRjN2C9jFesIIiAd1rUSFqXlAm0=; b=W1gs5jp73Kt5TpzkVZQ88L9SFVD3Uoho7qAA9sCNz7EfkJuam/tonvYQm5T7CmIgNU tF+uIvU27f6JKXiG/o0gRBkOD/Gjvp2uZjb5qrKnYDXqq/ksyFpA9UJI3JvyxAXIf4Au 19zF86aFhAQgYNleYd3eiR+oNECe3KpjE3iQyIPVyx8kQRnwoqPZCV8Bj58dziXNvHon XUosShJ9y5Fn56T+2gUISA/dhentZdSPyIR4qTg7iTUSVwk+f6CUWwTu0QbBtm33lxdY Ck5oGnNHY4TgZaMK1pmEGScbxub9tVSAIEktO7v4G4keMpvrA1oFpH7IYZYkuSf+gDOC qWjg== X-Received: by 10.182.246.39 with SMTP id xt7mr24133105obc.18.1373854392758; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:13:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: konklone@gmail.com Received: by 10.182.22.229 with HTTP; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:12:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> From: Eric Mill Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 22:12:32 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 63a4qVTmQKpN2MakHmBtNL0rjlg Message-ID: To: "Paul E. Jones" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2e2240db84004e18367b8 Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" , Tim Bray Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 02:13:14 -0000 --001a11c2e2240db84004e18367b8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This is making me want to set up my own. Paul, I can't seem to find yours? 404 at: http://packetizer.com/.well-known/webfinger?resource=3Dacct:paulej@packetiz= er.com -- Eric On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Paul E. Jones wrot= e: > Tim,**** > > ** ** > > You=92re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: = *** > * > > ** ** > > Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it > should be properly formatted.**** > > ** ** > > I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: > reply. I=92m happy to throw something in if you want to check a particul= ar > response.**** > > ** ** > > Paul**** > > ** ** > > *From:* webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] *O= n > Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM > *To:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > ** ** > > Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains t= o > test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T**** > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > > --=20 konklone.com | @konklone --001a11c2e2240db84004e18367b8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This is making me want to set up my own. Paul, I can't= seem to find yours? 404 at:



On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Paul E. J= ones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Tim,

=A0<= /p>

You=92re welcome to te= st my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp:

=A0<= /p>

Most of what is return= ed is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly form= atted.

=A0<= /p>

I have aliases, proper= ties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.=A0 I=92m happy t= o throw something in if you want to check a particular response.<= /u>

=A0<= /p>

Paul

=A0<= /p>

From: webfi= nger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject:= [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

=A0

Wor= king on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to tes= t JRD wrangling.=A0 Suggestions? -T


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger




--
--001a11c2e2240db84004e18367b8-- From tbray@textuality.com Sun Jul 14 19:35:17 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EF6721F9C05 for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:35:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cRFYYJ9UVpvy for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:35:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ve0-f179.google.com (mail-ve0-f179.google.com [209.85.128.179]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E65021F9B7F for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:35:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ve0-f179.google.com with SMTP id d10so9543991vea.38 for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:35:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=dren4Pk2EVVOrYlvlwx9JwdFIxRyQslE8UuJL7dligM=; b=ddE6wrdp3ORbKWInM9fPMTTpUKJOOhBCkHS5KBAi3ppQ8alxuSBvjNBtcw+qz3aZ8q O5gd9s5Pq8lfhK1nBJNCjhyhzWWWMYzA8jt28TUSRZixvz+O4HuhMAnMwdS2YIH2sB0q 13yVojFuObybh3eIPAdwDDk4TC++at3oAWVTYV+nJ9K7Jx29CY85n59lBq0ErUh6Sx7c wLSTaLrFbDSXtuWBmpSaKFWnFSLCCD+htLlthm9u2gs4s+UantripicMjKzNDqHzDMpg JkrCHC74vr4f44rmpq+6R/behfEfpbDXo01rsR1TYI1kA0cQUDjq6dS8pExPuZyn0AbF kscw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.236.199 with SMTP id uw7mr23912481vdc.18.1373855710636; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:35:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.219.200 with HTTP; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:35:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [24.84.235.32] In-Reply-To: References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 19:35:10 -0700 Message-ID: From: Tim Bray To: Eric Mill Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0111d9249aff9204e183b5aa X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnM/uULZEloQyKt7Iae1aXuJkl+VsDsSFtwe8lZ+gYdf3w+DOVRhLtCMMx1VK/O0cqA7jSz Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 02:35:17 -0000 --089e0111d9249aff9204e183b5aa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable You have to use https not http -T On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:12 PM, Eric Mill wrote: > This is making me want to set up my own. Paul, I can't seem to find yours= ? > 404 at: > > > http://packetizer.com/.well-known/webfinger?resource=3Dacct:paulej@packet= izer.com > > -- Eric > > > On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Paul E. Jones wr= ote: > >> Tim,**** >> >> ** ** >> >> You=E2=80=99re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: /= xmpp: ** >> ** >> >> ** ** >> >> Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but i= t >> should be properly formatted.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct= : >> reply. I=E2=80=99m happy to throw something in if you want to check a p= articular >> response.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Paul**** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] *= On >> Behalf Of *Tim Bray >> *Sent:* Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM >> *To:* webfinger@ietf.org >> *Subject:* [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains >> to test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T**** >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webfinger mailing list >> webfinger@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >> >> > > > -- > konklone.com | @konklone > --089e0111d9249aff9204e183b5aa Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
You have to use https not http -T


On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:12= PM, Eric Mill <eric@konklone.com> wrote:
This is making me want to s= et up my own. Paul, I can't seem to find yours? 404 at:

<= div> http://packetizer.com/.well-known/webf= inger?resource=3Dacct:paulej@packetizer.com

-- Eric

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013= at 10:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrot= e:

Tim,

=C2=A0

You=E2=80=99re welc= ome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: <= /span>

=C2=A0

Most of what is ret= urned is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly f= ormatted.

=C2=A0

I have aliases, pro= perties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.=C2=A0 I=E2=80= =99m happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular response= .

=C2=A0

Paul<= /span>

=C2=A0

From: webfi= nger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject:= [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

=C2=A0

= Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to = test JRD wrangling.=C2=A0 Suggestions? -T


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


<= br clear=3D"all">

--

--089e0111d9249aff9204e183b5aa-- From paulej@packetizer.com Mon Jul 15 12:25:05 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B08D11E8230 for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 12:25:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.541 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.541 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.058, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QSks7ahAr59B for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 12:25:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BB7821E8154 for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 12:24:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6FJOit0004502 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2013 15:24:44 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1373916284; bh=Ysrd/k4AuMIJcDQ8Hj7F23gOGPZ/QtFvSO1EsTJgUqg=; h=From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=DMr9Ga7Awr1FtQhdZ1YEQyWPEwz5/cJaSLE9rNLyW6Lbyksf7hI1UdNVIKx+xFzjG z8c10enFZ8DfAqa63zkIpn+QPHjy0TTIKWREhz1ed9SELggGGyDRzpHTwKxnthEC0D PC/7bw+X9MdrUKJ57nGf23WW29Y/g4hrQilLY+QA= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: References: <20130715192137.15300.78334.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20130715192137.15300.78334.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 15:24:52 -0400 Message-ID: <025201ce8190$fb00a400$f101ec00$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQLe6EURVrvCr65ZwnvSxZvkNw4V4ZdFUNDg Content-Language: en-us Subject: [webfinger] FW: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger-16.txt X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 19:25:05 -0000 Folks, We've posted a new version of the WebFinger draft that tries to address = a few minor points raised in recent discussions. I believe all major issues raised in the DISCUSSes have been resolved, = but we're still waiting on additional AD review. Paul > -----Original Message----- > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org] > Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 3:22 PM > To: Gonzalo Salgueiro; Joseph Smarr; Paul E. Jones; Paul Jones > Subject: New Version Notification for = draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger-16.txt >=20 >=20 > A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger-16.txt > has been successfully submitted by Paul E. Jones and posted to the > IETF repository. >=20 > Filename: draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger > Revision: 16 > Title: WebFinger > Creation date: 2013-07-15 > Group: appsawg > Number of pages: 21 > URL: = http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-appsawg- > webfinger-16.txt > Status: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-appsawg- > webfinger > Htmlized: = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger- > 16 > Diff: = http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-appsawg- > webfinger-16 >=20 > Abstract: > This specification defines the WebFinger protocol, which can be = used > to discover information about people or other entities on the > Internet using standard HTTP methods. WebFinger discovers > information for a URI that might not be usable as a locator > otherwise, such as account or email URIs. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > The IETF Secretariat From evan@e14n.com Thu Jul 18 00:07:03 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D69DE21F9F7A for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 00:07:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_42=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kgy-ZHZqTExy for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 00:06:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from office.statusnetinc.com (office.statusnetinc.com [50.57.148.252]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DF0521F9F3A for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 00:06:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.118] (modemcable023.225-203-24.mc.videotron.ca [24.203.225.23]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by office.statusnetinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DA6DC8D423D for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 07:25:22 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <51E79410.9070604@e14n.com> Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 03:06:56 -0400 From: Evan Prodromou User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130623 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: webfinger@ietf.org References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------000202030707020409070704" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 07:07:04 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------000202030707020409070704 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 13-07-14 05:53 PM, Tim Bray wrote: > Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate > addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T All pump.io accounts have Webfingers. https://identi.ca/.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:tbray@identi.ca -Evan --------------000202030707020409070704 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 13-07-14 05:53 PM, Tim Bray wrote:
Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling.  Suggestions? -T
All pump.io accounts have Webfingers.

    https://identi.ca/.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:tbray@identi.ca

-Evan

--------------000202030707020409070704-- From nick@silverbucket.net Thu Jul 18 03:01:36 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA7C911E8115 for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 03:01:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E8Ie9onPvAOL for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 03:01:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-f50.google.com (mail-la0-f50.google.com [209.85.215.50]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D122311E8113 for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 03:01:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f50.google.com with SMTP id ep20so2308030lab.37 for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 03:01:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=94JmnUbGgBxknMpwVgSYYF3aXz/YcbwuLPKjNzFERK4=; b=BvsbHfncn/fQ17JrsldEIJzI4gpMGeKoMP376IGDX+yuy+ZdzarEL3L9zAuz6A7E7J OS8Is5yuI1wvNqg/bNVTYTj5QR7nVW4JY2i7V1Nl/XMZPCQB00VsUCD25x7LmjHlpJbr 59jhiH777Pc9wlTO0boXrUxJFPJWrA+ZzCK7F5Z1lmBPdVa8buQOBIgBGaalU9UEVd6m Vn/HiwuMtj8l6Ji5wrio7D4i8yIAEgUJx4NXJL+zuhJ5JLWzdz6jNA2q1qaL0cNoxyim VaI/lZ8Rd+6InRejiA/2qRKtYZteC6ZMiEkwl462bNtokQab7YkTA394UEbW2xcOO8x1 pgkQ== X-Received: by 10.112.72.67 with SMTP id b3mr4998914lbv.35.1374141690065; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 03:01:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x233.google.com (mail-la0-x233.google.com [2a00:1450:4010:c03::233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id p20sm4152218lbb.17.2013.07.18.03.01.29 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 18 Jul 2013 03:01:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f51.google.com with SMTP id ga9so591611lab.24 for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 03:01:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.115.242 with SMTP id jr18mr4825009lab.7.1374141688714; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 03:01:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.73.239 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 03:01:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.73.239 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 03:01:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 12:01:28 +0200 Message-ID: From: Nick Jennings To: Tim Bray Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3327a3a1cc404e1c64b61 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl3IfAjZpNeD5T99LamcWclJsnyGkWbIHBeGRUc0RTj4CmaemmTBsJ4BiDjGGVZbcsv4o/j Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 10:01:36 -0000 --001a11c3327a3a1cc404e1c64b61 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 You're welcome to test me email address as well. On Jul 14, 2013 11:53 PM, "Tim Bray" wrote: > Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to > test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > > --001a11c3327a3a1cc404e1c64b61 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

You're welcome to test me email address as well.

On Jul 14, 2013 11:53 PM, "Tim Bray" &= lt;tbray@textuality.com> wro= te:
Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addr= esses/domains to test JRD wrangling.=C2=A0 Suggestions? -T

_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

--001a11c3327a3a1cc404e1c64b61-- From tbray@textuality.com Fri Jul 19 21:34:32 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 248FA21E80C6 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:34:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.726 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.726 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.250, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qECgPOdXF4PF for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:34:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vc0-f175.google.com (mail-vc0-f175.google.com [209.85.220.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2DD421F99E8 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:34:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vc0-f175.google.com with SMTP id ij15so2853191vcb.6 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:34:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=l7+0gWlYleH18dJEAG+RDJ8n8BCg4wPfpUwxfnQ6fUw=; b=e6sGPd+Z9pPE24GQoZCNe0c/wt6W1cBvKhr+m5GrkBu2ZaNU8NOmLXAx7GMX5spTwn SM/TUOvFMbIVvBnxU6qC9vSOgX5CO9duVvgeLizAQncu6uxZ1Y71CkCWhUHFdfn26Rb5 FaPgNVASx8xw9TIKAUq7oRjocwGlU1549XMsiTwiuUbq1rNUz5xNW5zodyG7gB0m3EEh ZmUn4cAEE1exwVM0l4k31+Z0zoBoI+pf4u7LjLGVtLU39qCgTAu2Hzq+5yg5paVFwvKv C6ZDvZjrygXolcSwb7SIAnlLu8/sqwXdGx3kEkLkJIU897dFX1PW1efs6+zlz1990aXE qQ4g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.94.6 with SMTP id cy6mr5560702vdb.108.1374294864120; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:34:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.219.200 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:34:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [24.84.235.32] In-Reply-To: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:34:24 -0700 Message-ID: From: Tim Bray To: "Paul E. Jones" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf307abe9f31918304e1e9f525 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlm3x4lrd2rq9R/pJhCukbOm2kbdYxRBcWnU2mTUqj+vlFNZhBQeWT6x9CSWA7BtTP8C6Yj Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 04:34:32 -0000 --20cf307abe9f31918304e1e9f525 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=3D=EF=BB=BF http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote= : > Tim,**** > > ** ** > > You=E2=80=99re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / = xmpp: *** > * > > ** ** > > Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it > should be properly formatted.**** > > ** ** > > I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: > reply. I=E2=80=99m happy to throw something in if you want to check a pa= rticular > response.**** > > ** ** > > Paul**** > > ** ** > > *From:* webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] *O= n > Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM > *To:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > ** ** > > Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains t= o > test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T**** > --20cf307abe9f31918304e1e9f525 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=3D=EF=BB=BFhttp://openid.net/specs/connect= /1.0/issuer


On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@pac= ketizer.com> wrote:

Tim,

=C2=A0

You=E2=80=99re welc= ome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: <= /span>

=C2=A0

Most of what is ret= urned is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly f= ormatted.

=C2=A0

I have aliases, pro= perties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.=C2=A0 I=E2=80= =99m happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular response= .

=C2=A0

Paul<= /span>

=C2=A0

From: webfi= nger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject:= [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

=C2=A0

= Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to = test JRD wrangling.=C2=A0 Suggestions? -T


--20cf307abe9f31918304e1e9f525-- From tbray@textuality.com Fri Jul 19 21:37:11 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 506E721E80C9 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:37:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.749 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.227, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BTtaRIDWjzuv for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:37:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vb0-f54.google.com (mail-vb0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6585521E80C6 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:37:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vb0-f54.google.com with SMTP id q12so3648199vbe.27 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:37:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=RW3aww7K4GWsm5edXrn6Hi4zOTIW13EBGfy0AVgiYR8=; b=ncMEwDRctPB2Ng3CJvv8GwZZVnqV6ponHyrbSiHWmlzVK+qh+ZtK6xm6E3glNEy44o IHEGSDhILDMqV0mWg3JsmsKYwfzw9T87Byq/SYnkaYN2Spo2LKuPOJRDTl9nIokPdhbZ dQO6pc22gL6nrxyEHKf2ZbnWwVpibkbtEeVri92DUkEpScu5pTIQnYDSgKaVWEuTDoMU zzJMafSjYofUpAOq18q47JN+OwvKFhrOeHo6V4VjiPiTOB+oEnSYe4duO6gElVCh2UcF ZeKTftzIVmHbGmGZVrgYh/qhNAoV+pKM2bj49tlr3yXGFzJLqlgTWEvDuyCg8MJQ51bN mXsA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.197.72 with SMTP id ej8mr6750480vcb.66.1374295025822; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:37:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.219.200 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:37:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [24.84.235.32] In-Reply-To: References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:37:05 -0700 Message-ID: From: Tim Bray To: "Paul E. Jones" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c1f08ed4efd104e1e9febd X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmJNJFoDVKaFSJzsZK8s5a/XxVXexwJVNCHiR1YR7bunh3TQM9CpT5LnxIAUgHiFF/wDQx1 Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 04:37:11 -0000 --001a11c1f08ed4efd104e1e9febd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 538> curl ' http://silverbucket.net/.well-known/webfinger?resource=3Dacct:nick@silverbu= cket.net ' curl: (7) couldn't connect to host On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Tim Bray wrote: > Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=3D=EF=BB=BF > http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer > > > On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones wro= te: > >> Tim,**** >> >> ** ** >> >> You=E2=80=99re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: /= xmpp: ** >> ** >> >> ** ** >> >> Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but i= t >> should be properly formatted.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct= : >> reply. I=E2=80=99m happy to throw something in if you want to check a p= articular >> response.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Paul**** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] *= On >> Behalf Of *Tim Bray >> *Sent:* Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM >> *To:* webfinger@ietf.org >> *Subject:* [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains >> to test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T**** >> > > --001a11c1f08ed4efd104e1e9febd Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=C2=A0538> curl 'http://silver= bucket.net/.well-known/webfinger?resource=3Dacct:nick@silverbucket.net&= #39;
curl: (7) couldn't connect to host



On = Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:
Got an OpenID Connect provi= der? rel=3D=EF=BB=BFhttp://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. J= ones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Tim,

=C2=A0

You=E2=80=99re welc= ome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: <= /span>

=C2=A0

Most of what is ret= urned is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly f= ormatted.

=C2=A0

I have aliases, pro= perties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.=C2=A0 I=E2=80= =99m happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular response= .

=C2=A0

Paul<= /span>

=C2=A0

From: webfi= nger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject:= [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

=C2=A0

= Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to = test JRD wrangling.=C2=A0 Suggestions? -T



--001a11c1f08ed4efd104e1e9febd-- From paulej@packetizer.com Sat Jul 20 07:50:06 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AC2A11E810C for ; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 07:50:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.528 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.528 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.070, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TVKLgnGmq517 for ; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 07:50:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F57621E80A1 for ; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 07:49:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dyn-157.arid.us (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6KEnwdn015109 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 20 Jul 2013 10:49:58 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1374331798; bh=gK7pYVUoH8b1CMJP+eEQHQGakJBQb7NfyOnhJKouko4=; h=In-Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Subject:From: Date:To:CC:Message-ID; b=ZAtWX0NIW29vsndsuHktQLvZPxHO2F2C/6LIxWMizhDmxWiFc9T0+Wl8cqe0xK9sH DCGwb3oaqO/eqKzp4uWLCOBGypEewQgYXqhOuLAno7V6lXjmXqlUdK8wDgO0xOU8iq 2Dhc/Nudm/py0EElaEhNzzbHCDBjqPywF3bsrQMk= User-Agent: Kaiten Mail In-Reply-To: References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----CTPYRMR2FORNBG6BC9XTJPBJPMGRBR" From: "Paul E. Jones" Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 10:49:56 -0400 To: Tim Bray Message-ID: <2bbd90f2-86a0-48bd-9694-f73f565c891d@email.android.com> Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:50:06 -0000 ------CTPYRMR2FORNBG6BC9XTJPBJPMGRBR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I don't. Perhaps Mike Jones can direct you to somewhere? -------- Original Message -------- From: Tim Bray Sent: Sat Jul 20 00:34:24 EDT 2013 To: "Paul E. Jones" Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel= http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: > Tim,**** > > ** ** > > You’re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: *** > * > > ** ** > > Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it > should be properly formatted.**** > > ** ** > > I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: > reply. I’m happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular > response.**** > > ** ** > > Paul**** > > ** ** > > *From:* webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] *On > Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM > *To:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > ** ** > > Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to > test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T**** > ------CTPYRMR2FORNBG6BC9XTJPBJPMGRBR Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

I don't. Perhaps Mike Jones can direct you to somewhere?



From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Sent: Sat Jul 20 00:34:24 EDT 2013
To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer


On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Tim,

 

You’re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp:

 

Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly formatted.

 

I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.  I’m happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular response.

 

Paul

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling.  Suggestions? -T


------CTPYRMR2FORNBG6BC9XTJPBJPMGRBR-- From Michael.Jones@microsoft.com Sat Jul 20 16:34:04 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EDEC21F86B2 for ; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 16:34:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.251 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.251 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.653, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pcPcA7hqp30e for ; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 16:33:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from db9outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (mail-db9lp0251.outbound.messaging.microsoft.com [213.199.154.251]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E0FB21F99B0 for ; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 16:33:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail9-db9-R.bigfish.com (10.174.16.247) by DB9EHSOBE025.bigfish.com (10.174.14.88) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.22; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 23:33:57 +0000 Received: from mail9-db9 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail9-db9-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35BA1C800B6; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 23:33:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:131.107.125.8; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com; RD:autodiscover.service.exchange.microsoft.com; EFVD:NLI X-SpamScore: -21 X-BigFish: VS-21(zz98dI9371Ic89bhc857hdbb0izz1f42h208ch1ee6h1de0h1fdah2073h1202h1e76h1d1ah1d2ah1fc6hzz8275ch1d7338h1de098h1033IL177df4h17326ah18c673h1de097h1de096h8275bh8275dhz2fh2a8h668h839hd25hf0ah1288h12a5h12bdh137ah1441h1504h1537h153bh15d0h162dh1631h1758h18e1h1946h19b5h19ceh1b0ah1bceh1d0ch1d2eh1d3fh1dfeh1dffh1e1dh1155h) Received-SPF: pass (mail9-db9: domain of microsoft.com designates 131.107.125.8 as permitted sender) client-ip=131.107.125.8; envelope-from=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; helo=TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ; icrosoft.com ; Received: from mail9-db9 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail9-db9 (MessageSwitch) id 1374363235123135_32110; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 23:33:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from DB9EHSMHS015.bigfish.com (unknown [10.174.16.241]) by mail9-db9.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17AF5920046; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 23:33:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (131.107.125.8) by DB9EHSMHS015.bigfish.com (10.174.14.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.16.227.3; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 23:33:54 +0000 Received: from TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.1.38]) by TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.79.174]) with mapi id 14.03.0136.001; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 23:33:37 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: Tim Bray , "Paul E. Jones" Thread-Topic: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Thread-Index: AQHOgNyhR98yiOTSfk+IRcqp3VDu5plk/kQAgAgE1ACAAT06UA== Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 23:33:36 +0000 Message-ID: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.34] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7ATK5EX14MBXC284r_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%0$Dn%*$RO%0$TLS%0$FQDN%$TlsDn% Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" , "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 23:34:04 -0000 --_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7ATK5EX14MBXC284r_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 U2VlIGh0dHA6Ly9vc2lzLmlkY29tbW9ucy5uZXQvd2lraS9DYXRlZ29yeTpPQzVfT1AgZm9yIGEg bGlzdCBvZiBPcGVuSUQgcHJvdmlkZXJzLCBtb3N0IG9mIHdoaWNoIGltcGxlbWVudCBEaXNjb3Zl cnksIGluY2x1ZGluZyBXZWJGaW5nZXIuDQoNCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIC0tIE1pa2UNCg0KRnJvbTogd2ViZmluZ2Vy LWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmcgW21haWx0bzp3ZWJmaW5nZXItYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZ10gT24g QmVoYWxmIE9mIFRpbSBCcmF5DQpTZW50OiBGcmlkYXksIEp1bHkgMTksIDIwMTMgOTozNCBQTQ0K VG86IFBhdWwgRS4gSm9uZXMNCkNjOiB3ZWJmaW5nZXJAaWV0Zi5vcmcNClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBb d2ViZmluZ2VyXSBMb29raW5nIGZvciBKUkRzDQoNCkdvdCBhbiBPcGVuSUQgQ29ubmVjdCBwcm92 aWRlcj8gcmVsPe+7v2h0dHA6Ly9vcGVuaWQubmV0L3NwZWNzL2Nvbm5lY3QvMS4wL2lzc3Vlcg0K DQpPbiBTdW4sIEp1bCAxNCwgMjAxMyBhdCA3OjA3IFBNLCBQYXVsIEUuIEpvbmVzIDxwYXVsZWpA cGFja2V0aXplci5jb208bWFpbHRvOnBhdWxlakBwYWNrZXRpemVyLmNvbT4+IHdyb3RlOg0KVGlt LA0KDQpZb3XigJlyZSB3ZWxjb21lIHRvIHRlc3QgbXkgYWRkcmVzc2VzLCBpbmNsdWRpbmcgbWFp bHRvOiAvIGFjY3Q6IC8geG1wcDoNCg0KTW9zdCBvZiB3aGF0IGlzIHJldHVybmVkIGlzIGp1c3Qg dGVzdCBkYXRhICh0aG91Z2ggc29tZSBpcyB2YWxpZCksIGJ1dCBpdCBzaG91bGQgYmUgcHJvcGVy bHkgZm9ybWF0dGVkLg0KDQpJIGhhdmUgYWxpYXNlcywgcHJvcGVydGllcywgdGl0bGVzLCBhbmQg bm9uLUFTQ0lJIGNoYXJhY3RlcnMgaW4gdGhlIGFjY3Q6IHJlcGx5LiAgSeKAmW0gaGFwcHkgdG8g dGhyb3cgc29tZXRoaW5nIGluIGlmIHlvdSB3YW50IHRvIGNoZWNrIGEgcGFydGljdWxhciByZXNw b25zZS4NCg0KUGF1bA0KDQpGcm9tOiB3ZWJmaW5nZXItYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZzxtYWlsdG86 d2ViZmluZ2VyLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmc+IFttYWlsdG86d2ViZmluZ2VyLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0 Zi5vcmc8bWFpbHRvOndlYmZpbmdlci1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnPl0gT24gQmVoYWxmIE9mIFRp bSBCcmF5DQpTZW50OiBTdW5kYXksIEp1bHkgMTQsIDIwMTMgNTo1NCBQTQ0KVG86IHdlYmZpbmdl ckBpZXRmLm9yZzxtYWlsdG86d2ViZmluZ2VyQGlldGYub3JnPg0KU3ViamVjdDogW3dlYmZpbmdl cl0gTG9va2luZyBmb3IgSlJEcw0KDQpXb3JraW5nIG9uIHNvbWUgV0YgY29kZS4uLiBsb29raW5n IGZvciBzb21lIGNhbmRpZGF0ZSBhZGRyZXNzZXMvZG9tYWlucyB0byB0ZXN0IEpSRCB3cmFuZ2xp bmcuICBTdWdnZXN0aW9ucz8gLVQNCg0K --_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7ATK5EX14MBXC284r_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6dj0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTp2bWwiIHhtbG5zOm89InVy bjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206b2ZmaWNlOm9mZmljZSIgeG1sbnM6dz0idXJuOnNjaGVt YXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6d29yZCIgeG1sbnM6bT0iaHR0cDovL3NjaGVtYXMubWlj cm9zb2Z0LmNvbS9vZmZpY2UvMjAwNC8xMi9vbW1sIiB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcv VFIvUkVDLWh0bWw0MCI+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIg Y29udGVudD0idGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjxtZXRhIG5hbWU9IkdlbmVyYXRv ciIgY29udGVudD0iTWljcm9zb2Z0IFdvcmQgMTQgKGZpbHRlcmVkIG1lZGl1bSkiPg0KPHN0eWxl PjwhLS0NCi8qIEZvbnQgRGVmaW5pdGlvbnMgKi8NCkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6 Q2FsaWJyaTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDE1IDUgMiAyIDIgNCAzIDIgNDt9DQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJ e2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OlRhaG9tYTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDExIDYgNCAzIDUgNCA0IDIgNDt9DQov KiBTdHlsZSBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KcC5Nc29Ob3JtYWwsIGxpLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgZGl2Lk1z b05vcm1hbA0KCXttYXJnaW46MGluOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206LjAwMDFwdDsNCglmb250LXNp emU6MTIuMHB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4iLCJzZXJpZiI7fQ0KYTps aW5rLCBzcGFuLk1zb0h5cGVybGluaw0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6OTk7DQoJY29sb3I6 Ymx1ZTsNCgl0ZXh0LWRlY29yYXRpb246dW5kZXJsaW5lO30NCmE6dmlzaXRlZCwgc3Bhbi5Nc29I eXBlcmxpbmtGb2xsb3dlZA0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6OTk7DQoJY29sb3I6cHVycGxl Ow0KCXRleHQtZGVjb3JhdGlvbjp1bmRlcmxpbmU7fQ0KcC5Nc29BY2V0YXRlLCBsaS5Nc29BY2V0 YXRlLCBkaXYuTXNvQWNldGF0ZQ0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6OTk7DQoJbXNvLXN0eWxl LWxpbms6IkJhbGxvb24gVGV4dCBDaGFyIjsNCgltYXJnaW46MGluOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206 LjAwMDFwdDsNCglmb250LXNpemU6OC4wcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IlRhaG9tYSIsInNhbnMt c2VyaWYiO30NCnNwYW4uRW1haWxTdHlsZTE3DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10eXBlOnBlcnNvbmFsLXJl cGx5Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI7DQoJY29sb3I6IzFGNDk3 RDt9DQpzcGFuLkJhbGxvb25UZXh0Q2hhcg0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtbmFtZToiQmFsbG9vbiBUZXh0 IENoYXIiOw0KCW1zby1zdHlsZS1wcmlvcml0eTo5OTsNCgltc28tc3R5bGUtbGluazoiQmFsbG9v biBUZXh0IjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiVGFob21hIiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI7fQ0KLk1zb0NocERl ZmF1bHQNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6ZXhwb3J0LW9ubHk7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbGli cmkiLCJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIjt9DQpAcGFnZSBXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjENCgl7c2l6ZTo4LjVpbiAxMS4w aW47DQoJbWFyZ2luOjEuMGluIDEuMGluIDEuMGluIDEuMGluO30NCmRpdi5Xb3JkU2VjdGlvbjEN Cgl7cGFnZTpXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjE7fQ0KLS0+PC9zdHlsZT48IS0tW2lmIGd0ZSBtc28gOV0+PHht bD4NCjxvOnNoYXBlZGVmYXVsdHMgdjpleHQ9ImVkaXQiIHNwaWRtYXg9IjEwMjYiIC8+DQo8L3ht bD48IVtlbmRpZl0tLT48IS0tW2lmIGd0ZSBtc28gOV0+PHhtbD4NCjxvOnNoYXBlbGF5b3V0IHY6 ZXh0PSJlZGl0Ij4NCjxvOmlkbWFwIHY6ZXh0PSJlZGl0IiBkYXRhPSIxIiAvPg0KPC9vOnNoYXBl bGF5b3V0PjwveG1sPjwhW2VuZGlmXS0tPg0KPC9oZWFkPg0KPGJvZHkgbGFuZz0iRU4tVVMiIGxp bms9ImJsdWUiIHZsaW5rPSJwdXJwbGUiPg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iV29yZFNlY3Rpb24xIj4NCjxw IGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0 OTdEIj5TZWUNCjxhIGhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly9vc2lzLmlkY29tbW9ucy5uZXQvd2lraS9DYXRlZ29y eTpPQzVfT1AiPmh0dHA6Ly9vc2lzLmlkY29tbW9ucy5uZXQvd2lraS9DYXRlZ29yeTpPQzVfT1A8 L2E+IGZvciBhIGxpc3Qgb2YgT3BlbklEIHByb3ZpZGVycywgbW9zdCBvZiB3aGljaCBpbXBsZW1l bnQgRGlzY292ZXJ5LCBpbmNsdWRpbmcgV2ViRmluZ2VyLjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4N CjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQt ZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjoj MUY0OTdEIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFs Ij48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJp JnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5i c3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5i c3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5i c3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 IC0tIE1pa2U8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3Bh biBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7 LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48 L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PGI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6 ZToxMC4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7VGFob21hJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYm cXVvdDsiPkZyb206PC9zcGFuPjwvYj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDtmb250 LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtUYWhvbWEmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90OyI+IHdlYmZp bmdlci1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnIFttYWlsdG86d2ViZmluZ2VyLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmdd DQo8Yj5PbiBCZWhhbGYgT2YgPC9iPlRpbSBCcmF5PGJyPg0KPGI+U2VudDo8L2I+IEZyaWRheSwg SnVseSAxOSwgMjAxMyA5OjM0IFBNPGJyPg0KPGI+VG86PC9iPiBQYXVsIEUuIEpvbmVzPGJyPg0K PGI+Q2M6PC9iPiB3ZWJmaW5nZXJAaWV0Zi5vcmc8YnI+DQo8Yj5TdWJqZWN0OjwvYj4gUmU6IFt3 ZWJmaW5nZXJdIExvb2tpbmcgZm9yIEpSRHM8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFz cz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNv Tm9ybWFsIj5Hb3QgYW4gT3BlbklEIENvbm5lY3QgcHJvdmlkZXI/IHJlbD3vu788YSBocmVmPSJo dHRwOi8vb3BlbmlkLm5ldC9zcGVjcy9jb25uZWN0LzEuMC9pc3N1ZXIiPmh0dHA6Ly9vcGVuaWQu bmV0L3NwZWNzL2Nvbm5lY3QvMS4wL2lzc3VlcjwvYT48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0K PGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tOjEyLjBwdCI+ PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+T24gU3Vu LCBKdWwgMTQsIDIwMTMgYXQgNzowNyBQTSwgUGF1bCBFLiBKb25lcyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFp bHRvOnBhdWxlakBwYWNrZXRpemVyLmNvbSIgdGFyZ2V0PSJfYmxhbmsiPnBhdWxlakBwYWNrZXRp emVyLmNvbTwvYT4mZ3Q7IHdyb3RlOjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBj bGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdp bi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG8iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0 OTdEIj5UaW0sPC9zcGFuPjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5 bGU9Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tLWFsdDphdXRvIj48 c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1 b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+Jm5ic3A7PC9zcGFuPjxv OnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9w LWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tLWFsdDphdXRvIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1z aXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2Vy aWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+WW914oCZcmUgd2VsY29tZSB0byB0ZXN0IG15IGFkZHJl c3NlcywgaW5jbHVkaW5nIG1haWx0bzogLyBhY2N0OiAvIHhtcHA6DQo8L3NwYW4+PG86cD48L286 cD48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1 dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG8iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEu MHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90 Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj4mbmJzcDs8L3NwYW4+PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0i TXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0 b20tYWx0OmF1dG8iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZx dW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj5N b3N0IG9mIHdoYXQgaXMgcmV0dXJuZWQgaXMganVzdCB0ZXN0IGRhdGEgKHRob3VnaCBzb21lIGlz IHZhbGlkKSwgYnV0IGl0IHNob3VsZCBiZSBwcm9wZXJseSBmb3JtYXR0ZWQuPC9zcGFuPjxvOnA+ PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFs dDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tLWFsdDphdXRvIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXpl OjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYm cXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+Jm5ic3A7PC9zcGFuPjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xh c3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4t Ym90dG9tLWFsdDphdXRvIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWls eTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3 RCI+SSBoYXZlIGFsaWFzZXMsIHByb3BlcnRpZXMsIHRpdGxlcywgYW5kIG5vbi1BU0NJSSBjaGFy YWN0ZXJzIGluIHRoZSBhY2N0OiByZXBseS4mbmJzcDsgSeKAmW0gaGFwcHkgdG8gdGhyb3cNCiBz b21ldGhpbmcgaW4gaWYgeW91IHdhbnQgdG8gY2hlY2sgYSBwYXJ0aWN1bGFyIHJlc3BvbnNlLjwv c3Bhbj48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtc28tbWFy Z2luLXRvcC1hbHQ6YXV0bzttc28tbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbS1hbHQ6YXV0byI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtz YW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPiZuYnNwOzwvc3Bhbj48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwv cD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtc28tbWFyZ2luLXRvcC1hbHQ6YXV0bztt c28tbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbS1hbHQ6YXV0byI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7 Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2Nv bG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPlBhdWw8L3NwYW4+PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9y bWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0 OmF1dG8iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0Nh bGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj4mbmJzcDs8 L3NwYW4+PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJib3JkZXI6bm9uZTtib3JkZXItbGVm dDpzb2xpZCBibHVlIDEuNXB0O3BhZGRpbmc6MGluIDBpbiAwaW4gNC4wcHQiPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxk aXYgc3R5bGU9ImJvcmRlcjpub25lO2JvcmRlci10b3A6c29saWQgI0I1QzRERiAxLjBwdDtwYWRk aW5nOjMuMHB0IDBpbiAwaW4gMGluIj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtc28t bWFyZ2luLXRvcC1hbHQ6YXV0bzttc28tbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbS1hbHQ6YXV0byI+PGI+PHNwYW4g c3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7VGFob21hJnF1b3Q7LCZx dW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDsiPkZyb206PC9zcGFuPjwvYj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1z aXplOjEwLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtUYWhvbWEmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJp ZiZxdW90OyI+DQo8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86d2ViZmluZ2VyLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmciIHRh cmdldD0iX2JsYW5rIj53ZWJmaW5nZXItYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZzwvYT4gW21haWx0bzo8YSBo cmVmPSJtYWlsdG86d2ViZmluZ2VyLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmciIHRhcmdldD0iX2JsYW5rIj53 ZWJmaW5nZXItYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZzwvYT5dDQo8Yj5PbiBCZWhhbGYgT2YgPC9iPlRpbSBC cmF5PGJyPg0KPGI+U2VudDo8L2I+IFN1bmRheSwgSnVseSAxNCwgMjAxMyA1OjU0IFBNPGJyPg0K PGI+VG86PC9iPiA8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86d2ViZmluZ2VyQGlldGYub3JnIiB0YXJnZXQ9Il9i bGFuayI+d2ViZmluZ2VyQGlldGYub3JnPC9hPjxicj4NCjxiPlN1YmplY3Q6PC9iPiBbd2ViZmlu Z2VyXSBMb29raW5nIGZvciBKUkRzPC9zcGFuPjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0 OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG8iPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0K PGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtc28tbWFyZ2luLXRvcC1hbHQ6YXV0 bzttc28tbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbS1hbHQ6YXV0byI+V29ya2luZyBvbiBzb21lIFdGIGNvZGUuLi4g bG9va2luZyBmb3Igc29tZSBjYW5kaWRhdGUgYWRkcmVzc2VzL2RvbWFpbnMgdG8gdGVzdCBKUkQg d3JhbmdsaW5nLiZuYnNwOyBTdWdnZXN0aW9ucz8gLVQ8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0K PC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3Jt YWwiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYm9keT4NCjwvaHRt bD4NCg== --_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7ATK5EX14MBXC284r_-- From Michael.Jones@microsoft.com Sat Jul 20 22:52:30 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FDC321F9E6A for ; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 22:52:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.235 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.363, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t-48KIvtvplC for ; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 22:52:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from co9outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (co9ehsobe001.messaging.microsoft.com [207.46.163.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0642221F9FCC for ; Sat, 20 Jul 2013 22:52:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail39-co9-R.bigfish.com (10.236.132.235) by CO9EHSOBE025.bigfish.com (10.236.130.88) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.22; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 05:52:16 +0000 Received: from mail39-co9 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail39-co9-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22C04D00186; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 05:52:16 +0000 (UTC) X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:131.107.125.8; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:TK5EX14HUBC102.redmond.corp.microsoft.com; RD:autodiscover.service.exchange.microsoft.com; EFVD:NLI X-SpamScore: -13 X-BigFish: VS-13(zz98dI9371Ic85fhdd00pdbb0izz1f42h208ch1ee6h1de0h1fdah2073h1202h1e76h1d1ah1d2ah1fc6hzz8275ch16d858h1d7338h1de098h1033IL177df4h17326ah18c673h1de097h1de096h8275bh8275dhz2fh2a8h668h839hd25hf0ah1288h12a5h12bdh137ah1441h1504h1537h153bh15d0h162dh1631h1758h18e1h1946h19b5h19ceh1b0ah1bceh1d0ch1d2eh1d3fh1dfeh1dffh1e1dh1155h) Received-SPF: pass (mail39-co9: domain of microsoft.com designates 131.107.125.8 as permitted sender) client-ip=131.107.125.8; envelope-from=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; helo=TK5EX14HUBC102.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ; icrosoft.com ; Received: from mail39-co9 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail39-co9 (MessageSwitch) id 1374385933588788_8824; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 05:52:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from CO9EHSMHS009.bigfish.com (unknown [10.236.132.248]) by mail39-co9.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A931A4004A; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 05:52:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TK5EX14HUBC102.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (131.107.125.8) by CO9EHSMHS009.bigfish.com (10.236.130.19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.16.227.3; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 05:52:10 +0000 Received: from TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.1.38]) by TK5EX14HUBC102.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.7.154]) with mapi id 14.03.0136.001; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 05:51:40 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" , Tim Bray , "Paul E. Jones" Thread-Topic: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Thread-Index: AQHOgNyhR98yiOTSfk+IRcqp3VDu5plk/kQAgAgE1ACAAT06UIAAahxg Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 05:51:39 +0000 Message-ID: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> In-Reply-To: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.37] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7TK5EX14MBXC284r_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%0$Dn%*$RO%0$TLS%0$FQDN%$TlsDn% Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 05:52:30 -0000 --_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7TK5EX14MBXC284r_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post speci= fic identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for testing = e-mail based discovery using WebFinger? Thanks all, -- Mike From: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-intero= p@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Jones Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID pro= viders, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger. -- Mike From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto= :webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=3Dhttp://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/i= ssuer On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones > wrote: Tim, You're welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it s= hould be properly formatted. I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: r= eply. I'm happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular re= sponse. Paul From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto= :webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf O= f Tim Bray Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM To: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to = test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= OpenID Connect Interop" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. --_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7TK5EX14MBXC284r_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Could those of you with O= penID OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e-m= ail address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger?

 <= /p>

    &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;     Thanks all,

    &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;     -- Mike

 <= /p>

From: openid-c= onnect-interop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups= .com] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM
To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

See http://osis.idco= mmons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most of = which implement Discovery, including WebFinger.

 <= /p>

    &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;     -- Mike

 <= /p>

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@i= etf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=3Dhttp://openid.net/specs/connect/1.= 0/issuer

 

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <<= a href=3D"mailto:paulej@packetizer.com" target=3D"_blank">paulej@packetizer= .com> wrote:

Tim,

 

You’re welcome to test my address= es, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp:

 

Most of what is returned is just test d= ata (though some is valid), but it should be properly formatted.

 

I have aliases, properties, titles, and= non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.  I’m happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular response.=

 

Paul

 

From: webfinger-b= ounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: webfinge= r@ietf.org
Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/do= mains to test JRD wrangling.  Suggestions? -T

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to = openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7TK5EX14MBXC284r_-- From paulej@packetizer.com Sun Jul 21 22:47:26 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDCFA21E809E for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 22:47:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VU8mvT7ktXSW for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 22:47:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6D6521F9E3B for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 22:47:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6M5lKDI025101 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:47:21 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1374472041; bh=0/YV3m7wJ9zTNr4CDkCbQWnD79hXqPN4TqBEGOVBDzY=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=tDd0HTbVUs76uECDl9g0YtZr7r2PnhaCbzBPBdLXBCQ1fHaxQx+UxRU+IgesyJ7db 3zwWA0Ej9ROr3Z6k7RkRF2L/GRl6X/VUJjMaBUofU8Ft3jSGGxTdYVXyrKW20XaPPk 3RNx1oJYX1+XmH8ZDbruz52QPi/emil5QbVBJtj8= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:47:22 -0400 Message-ID: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac6GnKy2JFrOlkfaRR6rWfzmXK/Deg== Content-Language: en-us Subject: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 05:47:27 -0000 Folks, One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". This term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a concrete meaning, namely this: absolute-URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to the above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, but to require the standard URI syntax: URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute" that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have an opinion on this? Paul From paulej@packetizer.com Sun Jul 21 22:50:24 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 533D621F9EB8 for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 22:50:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.535 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.535 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.064, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hwVr6yKdyNWu for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 22:50:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14A2121F9622 for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 22:50:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6M5oGDw025291 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:50:17 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1374472217; bh=kN5gEFuiroMJhcJmcK3RgCacccCfsyLHpPAWXZfWSdA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=cqTvyBfzLO80fRGS5IHITRp95BDcR8nINvDToVC4G5OaybMBnf/blzoddVmNVNuKv SnC4bql9R5xYm0uDO0IE02wiyKGC71sii64i0ZSjR7yxv9SWniOIXJumlHvRPK73qb mU8k+fS7HC/wMPNU4HBBPXCREwvJ7PkF0n1dkAS0= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:50:18 -0400 Message-ID: <028301ce869f$596c12a0$0c4437e0$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac6GnLRN4Jk8X/POQYqp7F2LyuxBnQ== Content-Language: en-us Cc: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_J._D=FCrst=22?=" Subject: [webfinger] Webfinger and URI vs IRI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 05:50:24 -0000 Folks, The term URI is used almost exclusively in the WebFinger spec, with IRI appearing only twice (outside of the reference). This is because URI is used in RFC 6415 almost exclusively. However, RFC 5988 uses the term IRI in most of the text. That said, RFC 5988 also says things like the "target IRI as a URI-Reference" ... I feel like we have a terminology problem and it's not quite clear to me how to fix it. Should we change every instance of URI to IRI? Should URI be used in most places, with IRI discussed specifically somewhere? Or is there even a need to mention IRI given that IRIs can be converted to URIs? I would really like to get this right, but it definitely does not look right now with only one normative use of IRI in section 4.4.4. Who can help me with this? Paul From tbray@textuality.com Sun Jul 21 23:15:43 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4885D21F9EC2 for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:15:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.828 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.828 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.148, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1DtYOfjKpoqK for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:15:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vb0-f52.google.com (mail-vb0-f52.google.com [209.85.212.52]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DFAB21F99E3 for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:15:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vb0-f52.google.com with SMTP id f12so4520622vbg.11 for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:15:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=xnGP6xmiizTxiCgmfUmHqmfB0h8FDdVl7p22pJ5fcpM=; b=mSYDK1OY0ObX4oER6dzQpsUckzaIF+MOQkF8L1n95LAmP5kZASq7LMD98cDEVCFvd1 44pb6+h5Py4yZ/shm79qYfbj1Dg8RJcBneTMsD7eHjEPOZvsUE/VWCiIejGoDpXL2v7O h40dzPon8XyT+CSWfYXNSlZ71dQVLJrfozdNOq/CFSLOd0U7iYHW3isYSlV9AnDbdTwI k96UNfXS6AFgm7fy6uxqyTziW6U/oQ7V7Q+gJIF43+JWwYdQdAPXzq01g/PbieC7vVUJ m7YPvJZSp8Gsr4FOPhTtqEIPQaRVFRBVMDMGvFIDixjfnePf3+onWgHl4SLbvKLJHLCI DpfQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.58.85.161 with SMTP id i1mr8748657vez.97.1374473735642; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:15:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.219.200 with HTTP; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:15:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [24.84.235.32] In-Reply-To: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:15:35 -0700 Message-ID: From: Tim Bray To: "Paul E. Jones" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b6da6acc431c804e2139aa5 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkYA9/6QCREiCQlRlaxvKEls4DY1zbo5lajuA5fG23rc94K+saZU/yVhrtnVuq856bZe4Jc Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 06:15:43 -0000 --047d7b6da6acc431c804e2139aa5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I just read your note 3 times, and I don=E2=80=99t get it. 3986 describes = the syntax of a =E2=80=9CURI reference=E2=80=9D to an absolute or relative URI.= A relative URI reference can have an arbitrary number of leading parts missing, e.g. //foo.bar/cat/dog?x=3Dy /cat/dog?x=3Dy ./dog?x=3Dy When specs specify absolute URIs, they typically just mean you can=E2=80=99= t omit any leading parts, it has nothing to do with whether a #fragment is there or not. -T On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 10:47 PM, Paul E. Jones wrot= e: > Folks, > > One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those > identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". This > term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have = a > concrete meaning, namely this: > > absolute-URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] > > And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD > specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to > the > above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs > (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). > > I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the > intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, > but to require the standard URI syntax: > > URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] > > Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute" > that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have an > opinion on this? > > Paul > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > --047d7b6da6acc431c804e2139aa5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I just read your note 3 times, and I d= on=E2=80=99t get it.=C2=A0 3986 describes the syntax of a =E2=80=9CURI refe= rence=E2=80=9D to an absolute or relative URI.=C2=A0 A relative URI referen= ce can have an arbitrary number of leading parts missing, e.g.

//foo.bar/cat/dog?x=3Dy
/cat/dog?x=3Dy
./dog?x= =3Dy

When specs specify absolute URIs, they typically just mea= n you can=E2=80=99t omit any leading parts, it has nothing to do with wheth= er a #fragment is there or not.=C2=A0 -T


On Sun,= Jul 21, 2013 at 10:47 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com>= ; wrote:
Folks,

One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs"= ;. =C2=A0This
term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a<= br> concrete meaning, namely this:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0absolute-URI =C2=A0=3D scheme ":" hier-part [= "?" query ]

And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD
specification. =C2=A0However, it was not clear to me whether that referred = to the
above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs
(i.e., those lacking a scheme specified).

I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. =C2=A0I believe the=
intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, but to require the standard URI syntax:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" = query ] [ "#" fragment ]

Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolut= e"
that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. =C2=A0Do ot= hers have an
opinion on this?

Paul


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

--047d7b6da6acc431c804e2139aa5-- From melvincarvalho@gmail.com Sun Jul 21 23:46:38 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04AE521F9655 for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:46:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cpfyUM-yhwPk for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:46:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x235.google.com (mail-la0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D97BF21E8063 for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:46:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f53.google.com with SMTP id fj20so3137441lab.26 for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:46:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=qAm1uFyI+MW0Ye4kR7pOeG2W9qdsqIzcd4UQfTHFCXE=; b=b+TmB2rEOCo6QQQvZYQSnHfv1KljE+IvW4YLOYIEYkLeP+qAsjaGpnr9iaHVSGkRt/ pl/26gvdBgGVY7yh6sr867+pylSCAvuZ3OdRcFprRcfqYWw4tqPv9SjJOidl1ndJzZ+N B+QW3gBgpvcoMOcEXv8l94q6dpukN8DThqlYpyDS9j8jqttwHISzp8/0RmoWV1KQQfCu 3R5/fv8eXOa5KGhQpY86MOC9dGfFT4bPavkm679r76fKsDkvemVXhKam2c0mYoLlJdFS kC7ZmrXPsHcgTQYMXRih2M9lZpl1PTBfPkcckNhca5+YXe18BRmNAVriadehQprrPxOd ddCA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.150.231 with SMTP id ul7mr11859865lbb.92.1374475585639; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:46:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.59.193 with HTTP; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:46:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:46:25 +0200 Message-ID: From: Melvin Carvalho To: "Paul E. Jones" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b3434c208db7a04e2140951 Cc: webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 06:46:38 -0000 --047d7b3434c208db7a04e2140951 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones wrote: > Folks, > > One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those > identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". This > term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a > concrete meaning, namely this: > > absolute-URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] > > And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD > specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to > the > above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs > (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). > > I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the > intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, > but to require the standard URI syntax: > > URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] > There are many ways that people do this, see: http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces > > Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute" > that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have an > opinion on this? > +1 on allowing relative URIs > > Paul > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > --047d7b3434c208db7a04e2140951 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:
Folks,

One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs"= ;. =A0This
term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a<= br> concrete meaning, namely this:

=A0 =A0 =A0absolute-URI =A0=3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?&quo= t; query ]

And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD
specification. =A0However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to = the
above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs
(i.e., those lacking a scheme specified).

I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. =A0I believe the intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, but to require the standard URI syntax:

=A0 =A0 =A0URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [= "#" fragment ]

=A0

Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolut= e"
that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. =A0Do other= s have an
opinion on this?

+1 on allowing relativ= e URIs
=A0

Paul


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

--047d7b3434c208db7a04e2140951-- From paulej@packetizer.com Mon Jul 22 00:03:30 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6CF611E80E0 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 00:03:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.537 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.537 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.061, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7c-p-QQ+lpzL for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 00:03:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12BA511E80DC for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 00:03:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dyn-170.arid.us (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6M73Muh029512 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Jul 2013 03:03:23 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1374476603; bh=h9VSXDfV6HDk48laO9vk72HdzCZ602eeAs7i3IdWThw=; h=In-Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Subject:From: Date:To:CC:Message-ID; b=RkLr0FGQnX1rxSSaPdjJeLruqWblGLOk8CRdaEpO/tAPiQSt5OG3MAaw9qjFfN607 MDNh5uvdgBCcxhhqHeds+n4c3qjlx1Qg+vZcCa8MfMshSDOVWuH9FLaXOiVIBzYwU9 T/LbtGypceJBDejAz2skzjdPJUctPYJXK4e8gcDQ= User-Agent: Kaiten Mail In-Reply-To: References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----PBCW73EABORJT0SLQC7JWP41GCWFPR" From: "Paul E. Jones" Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 03:03:16 -0400 To: Tim Bray Message-ID: Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:03:31 -0000 ------PBCW73EABORJT0SLQC7JWP41GCWFPR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit There is a section in 3986 that defines "absolute-URI". The syntax doors not allow for a fragment. I think the intent is to specify just "URI" and not absolute URI. Paul -------- Original Message -------- From: Tim Bray Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:15:35 EDT 2013 To: "Paul E. Jones" Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI I just read your note 3 times, and I don’t get it. 3986 describes the syntax of a “URI reference” to an absolute or relative URI. A relative URI reference can have an arbitrary number of leading parts missing, e.g. //foo.bar/cat/dog?x=y /cat/dog?x=y ./dog?x=y When specs specify absolute URIs, they typically just mean you can’t omit any leading parts, it has nothing to do with whether a #fragment is there or not. -T On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 10:47 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: > Folks, > > One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those > identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". This > term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a > concrete meaning, namely this: > > absolute-URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] > > And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD > specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to > the > above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs > (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). > > I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the > intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, > but to require the standard URI syntax: > > URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] > > Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute" > that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have an > opinion on this? > > Paul > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > ------PBCW73EABORJT0SLQC7JWP41GCWFPR Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

There is a section in 3986 that defines "absolute-URI". The syntax doors not allow for a fragment.

I think the intent is to specify just "URI" and not absolute URI.

Paul



From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:15:35 EDT 2013
To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI

I just read your note 3 times, and I don’t get it.  3986 describes the syntax of a “URI reference” to an absolute or relative URI.  A relative URI reference can have an arbitrary number of leading parts missing, e.g.

//foo.bar/cat/dog?x=y
/cat/dog?x=y
./dog?x=y

When specs specify absolute URIs, they typically just mean you can’t omit any leading parts, it has nothing to do with whether a #fragment is there or not.  -T


On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 10:47 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:
Folks,

One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those
identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs".  This
term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a
concrete meaning, namely this:

     absolute-URI  = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ]

And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD
specification.  However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to the
above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs
(i.e., those lacking a scheme specified).

I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham.  I believe the
intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax,
but to require the standard URI syntax:

     URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]

Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute"
that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec.  Do others have an
opinion on this?

Paul


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

------PBCW73EABORJT0SLQC7JWP41GCWFPR-- From paulej@packetizer.com Mon Jul 22 00:07:14 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5994821E808F for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 00:07:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.54 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.54 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.058, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ld1S03jo60on for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 00:07:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E034721E805D for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 00:07:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dyn-170.arid.us (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6M774C8029748 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Jul 2013 03:07:04 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1374476824; bh=6ohSnplg2NoBNBLv7+jTl7ZLBQ1+DH6enp1juIVuN2Y=; h=In-Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Subject:From: Date:To:CC:Message-ID; b=PpU9SMtrhf70Bh9wpp0JMUlXvpAFYRvENBIIdFpIiNfgVntQUlELJ4FR/xYAieDE/ BSj8AN9I/JY9tXnvhZaHxo+0mpW/qbd7Cp28l6ICRLZJLG7m75bjuY8lI8pJ95dMOF 5fRrqUiykiMWHjnXPGxO7IOVj3KDnKZ/KT0AczoY= User-Agent: Kaiten Mail In-Reply-To: References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----VDSZVIFSQKGSPGH5VBE53NY93VZXJS" From: "Paul E. Jones" Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 03:06:57 -0400 To: Melvin Carvalho Message-ID: <0a1140f5-24d9-4be6-aab4-1ae6a3d63c0c@email.android.com> Cc: webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:07:14 -0000 ------VDSZVIFSQKGSPGH5VBE53NY93VZXJS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate question would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be absolute, but not following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead just following "URI". Paul -------- Original Message -------- From: Melvin Carvalho Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013 To: "Paul E. Jones" Cc: webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones wrote: > Folks, > > One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those > identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". This > term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a > concrete meaning, namely this: > > absolute-URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] > > And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD > specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to > the > above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs > (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). > > I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the > intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, > but to require the standard URI syntax: > > URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] > There are many ways that people do this, see: http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces > > Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute" > that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have an > opinion on this? > +1 on allowing relative URIs > > Paul > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > ------VDSZVIFSQKGSPGH5VBE53NY93VZXJS Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate question would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be absolute, but not following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead just following "URI".

Paul



From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013
To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: webfinger <webfinger@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI




On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:
Folks,

One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those
identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs".  This
term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a
concrete meaning, namely this:

     absolute-URI  = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ]

And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD
specification.  However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to the
above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs
(i.e., those lacking a scheme specified).

I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham.  I believe the
intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax,
but to require the standard URI syntax:

     URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]

There are many ways that people do this, see:

http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces
 

Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute"
that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec.  Do others have an
opinion on this?

+1 on allowing relative URIs
 

Paul


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

------VDSZVIFSQKGSPGH5VBE53NY93VZXJS-- From melvincarvalho@gmail.com Mon Jul 22 01:04:40 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD0A421F8267 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:04:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 98SJYtywH8Za for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:04:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x233.google.com (mail-la0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0B9621F8616 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:04:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f51.google.com with SMTP id ga9so3276958lab.10 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:04:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=99+gf+rCUZCnbKWhp7O4UU+LT82dVmBgvGDVCU0kPko=; b=wdKiheKQIlsNIUzRI2KHe0wmIhyFyn7WlD1nVDyCHkHiK2ivD/VzJapcsWV3odIcG2 b2XW9w4NpKuzufRAuVmTfixI5z8HfYP3LtZ8qdEssswMZWIbPnA/AfBMw5zMsgYvSUxV Bj4HLvwK4y0jXnFKSgxVQ4yRxz4ZfEckMdWJONobfLrut3+FnTcV7iOkQrR7hZZKXIyq 9xqqGsMqo1dzpndRVZlgsJdpYkoC7TVb6Z8f7difpYOHYJSSntyJUq2rZH0Oigm4NT6s RQwOGpoCEP0JK63oNyVhSgu0nV+Xl9KZQfwfxOtFZ2Sd+MgJGmTvki5BNQY3JG7un+E1 akQg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.51.16 with SMTP id g16mr11694561lbo.0.1374480265623; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:04:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.59.193 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:04:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 10:04:25 +0200 Message-ID: From: Melvin Carvalho To: "Paul E. Jones" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113321defbbd1204e2151fe5 Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" , Tim Bray Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:04:40 -0000 --001a113321defbbd1204e2151fe5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 22 July 2013 09:03, Paul E. Jones wrote: > There is a section in 3986 that defines "absolute-URI". The syntax doors > not allow for a fragment. > > I think the intent is to specify just "URI" and not absolute URI. > Ah right, yes. Good catch. Yes, I think the "Absolute" part there is unnecessarily restrictive, and may limit interoperability. > Paul > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Tim Bray > *Sent:* Mon Jul 22 02:15:35 EDT 2013 > *To:* "Paul E. Jones" > *Cc:* "webfinger@ietf.org" > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI > > I just read your note 3 times, and I don=92t get it. 3986 describes the > syntax of a =93URI reference=94 to an absolute or relative URI. A relati= ve URI > reference can have an arbitrary number of leading parts missing, e.g. > > //foo.bar/cat/dog?x=3Dy > /cat/dog?x=3Dy > ./dog?x=3Dy > > When specs specify absolute URIs, they typically just mean you can=92t om= it > any leading parts, it has nothing to do with whether a #fragment is there > or not. -T > > > On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 10:47 PM, Paul E. Jones wr= ote: > >> Folks, >> >> One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., thos= e >> identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". Thi= s >> term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have= a >> concrete meaning, namely this: >> >> absolute-URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] >> >> And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD >> specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to >> the >> above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs >> (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). >> >> I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the >> intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, >> but to require the standard URI syntax: >> >> URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] >> >> Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute" >> that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have an >> opinion on this? >> >> Paul >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webfinger mailing list >> webfinger@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >> > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > > --001a113321defbbd1204e2151fe5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On 22 July 2013 09:03, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

There is a section in 39= 86 that defines "absolute-URI". The syntax doors not allow for a = fragment.

I think the intent is to specify just "URI" and no= t absolute URI.

Ah right, yes.=A0 Good catch.=A0= Yes, I think the "Absolute" part there is unnecessarily restrict= ive, and may limit interoperability.=A0
=A0

Paul



From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:15:35 EDT 2013
To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: "we= bfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI

I just read your note 3 times, and I d= on=92t get it.=A0 3986 describes the syntax of a =93URI reference=94 to an = absolute or relative URI.=A0 A relative URI reference can have an arbitrary= number of leading parts missing, e.g.

//foo.bar/cat/dog?x=3Dy
/cat/dog?x=3Dy
./dog?x= =3Dy

When specs specify absolute URIs, they typically just mea= n you can=92t omit any leading parts, it has nothing to do with whether a #= fragment is there or not.=A0 -T


On Sun,= Jul 21, 2013 at 10:47 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com>= ; wrote:
Folks,

One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs"= ;. =A0This
term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a<= br> concrete meaning, namely this:

=A0 =A0 =A0absolute-URI =A0=3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?&quo= t; query ]

And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD
specification. =A0However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to = the
above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs
(i.e., those lacking a scheme specified).

I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. =A0I believe the intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, but to require the standard URI syntax:

=A0 =A0 =A0URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [= "#" fragment ]

Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolut= e"
that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. =A0Do other= s have an
opinion on this?

Paul


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


--001a113321defbbd1204e2151fe5-- From melvincarvalho@gmail.com Mon Jul 22 01:09:51 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D07AF11E80F6 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:09:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jI73yGqCkV4a for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:09:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x233.google.com (mail-la0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 500A021F85B4 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f51.google.com with SMTP id ga9so3280196lab.10 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:08:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=+BVRjq78nDvYvKUusohTxOUHTlsuuAhB//p9zgqj8l8=; b=D3zVTiQ522aSzHwwnOCW61BbbK8nroVmCA43Mee71pQ5a9bNJkHzsD9VU/+1+lPf/5 BcS/oUrJdBIrMQ+OPYyG+DglspU+4brCx0FCXpOdOxUezknhA5ec0+SB+aTCzdTwpqSq N19J0amKfsXhRXl8VnZkKoFDdH8SaLUmPI0eeHhaTNYONNsaUCN9YXZvBT3zo5vfVUpp XmX41/wfJzZ7VpgbnqhTqz7MGFYPOi21xhC2/IO+2NelwnSjnIHUcVfbMFjGr7gHjAgX KzHjtyD7l++Ohyx1fFxbFzrJn8SghFf7z2zuYD68g6HrzyTaRVwH4vqr/WHxjbdUaOG5 K4fw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.198.164 with SMTP id jd4mr12023895lbc.74.1374480529158; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:08:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.59.193 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:08:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <0a1140f5-24d9-4be6-aab4-1ae6a3d63c0c@email.android.com> References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> <0a1140f5-24d9-4be6-aab4-1ae6a3d63c0c@email.android.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 10:08:49 +0200 Message-ID: From: Melvin Carvalho To: "Paul E. Jones" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c33f26b0f77404e2152f14 Cc: webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:09:51 -0000 --001a11c33f26b0f77404e2152f14 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones wrote: > In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate question > would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be absolute, but not > following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead just following "URI". > Yes, that's a good question. Generally relative URIs are relative to the document, but they need not be. For example they could be relative by default to the [supposed] webfinger registry. In JSON LD they have a @context variable which allows quite a bit of flexibility in this regard. I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered a must in standards based serialization (I suspect not) but they have the advantage of slightly increased data portability. > Paul > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Melvin Carvalho > *Sent:* Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013 > > *To:* "Paul E. Jones" > *Cc:* webfinger > > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI > > > > > On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those >> identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". This >> term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a >> concrete meaning, namely this: >> >> absolute-URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] >> >> And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD >> specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to >> the >> above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs >> (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). >> >> I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the >> intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, >> but to require the standard URI syntax: >> >> URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] >> > > There are many ways that people do this, see: > > http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces > > >> >> Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute" >> that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have an >> opinion on this? >> > > +1 on allowing relative URIs > > >> >> Paul >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webfinger mailing list >> webfinger@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >> > > --001a11c33f26b0f77404e2152f14 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

In not suggesting we use= or allow relative URIs. The immediate question would be "relative to = what". I think the URIs should be absolute, but not following the synt= ax of "absolute-URI", but instead just following "URI".=

Yes, that's a good question.=A0 Generally relat= ive URIs are relative to the document, but they need not be.=A0 For example= they could be relative by default to the [supposed] webfinger registry.=A0= In JSON LD they have a @context variable which allows quite a bit of flexi= bility in this regard.=A0 I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered a = must in standards based serialization (I suspect not) but they have the adv= antage of slightly increased data portability.
=A0

Paul



From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013

To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: webfinger <webfinger@ietf.org>

Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI



=
On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones <p= aulej@packetizer.com> wrote:
Folks,

One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs"= ;. =A0This
term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a<= br> concrete meaning, namely this:

=A0 =A0 =A0absolute-URI =A0=3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?&quo= t; query ]

And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD
specification. =A0However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to = the
above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs
(i.e., those lacking a scheme specified).

I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. =A0I believe the intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, but to require the standard URI syntax:

=A0 =A0 =A0URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [= "#" fragment ]

There are man= y ways that people do this, see:

http://tantek.com/= 2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces
=A0

Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolut= e"
that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. =A0Do other= s have an
opinion on this?

+1 on allowing relativ= e URIs
=A0

Paul


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


--001a11c33f26b0f77404e2152f14-- From paulej@packetizer.com Mon Jul 22 07:10:08 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBB0511E80F5 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:10:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.542 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.542 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.056, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2GrRXAWNX58l for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:10:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCDFC11E80AE for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:09:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6ME9w27022435 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Jul 2013 10:09:58 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1374502198; bh=kmcIjcQZwCDOTxv7beJxbptRr3F4/Zon1tc6T5lf4Oo=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=EwHmpMtslfGhFBjqk5tYZoHZxWSSpCynbm/px2I99JqJnVD4PJeoKBQz2DHtR98tn 9XnAGf5yVkqdmndr0hfcph81wa0y6ul0LU44DeOrfbVBqv5y7UmoNL/YTiyyD2/3ea d9wPjcaBzlplN06QBkaJw6H7nYNH6x1VlUkFTJss= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Melvin Carvalho'" References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> <0a1140f5-24d9-4be6-aab4-1ae6a3d63c0c@email.android.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 10:10:00 -0400 Message-ID: <032701ce86e5$27b2dff0$77189fd0$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0328_01CE86C3.A0A27870" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQGbBSn4eLdZ0GwQKG6t3MRTa4capgJDGRYaAu5vqZkDRM75ipmUDKHQ Content-Language: en-us Cc: 'webfinger' Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:10:08 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0328_01CE86C3.A0A27870 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Melvin, It's easy enough to replace strings in URIs should data need to be ported. I suggest we remove the word "absolute" where we currently have "absolute URI" and then introduce a new paragraph in the terminology section as follows: The use of URIs throughout this document refers to URIs following the syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986. Relative URIs, having syntax following that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger. Is that clear? Paul From: Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones wrote: In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate question would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be absolute, but not following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead just following "URI". Yes, that's a good question. Generally relative URIs are relative to the document, but they need not be. For example they could be relative by default to the [supposed] webfinger registry. In JSON LD they have a @context variable which allows quite a bit of flexibility in this regard. I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered a must in standards based serialization (I suspect not) but they have the advantage of slightly increased data portability. Paul _____ From: Melvin Carvalho Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013 To: "Paul E. Jones" Cc: webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones wrote: Folks, One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". This term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a concrete meaning, namely this: absolute-URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to the above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, but to require the standard URI syntax: URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] There are many ways that people do this, see: http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute" that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have an opinion on this? +1 on allowing relative URIs Paul _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger ------=_NextPart_000_0328_01CE86C3.A0A27870 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Melvin,

 

It’s easy enough to replace strings in URIs should data need to = be ported.  I suggest we remove the word “absolute” = where we currently have “absolute URI” and then introduce a = new paragraph in the terminology section as = follows:

 

The use of URIs throughout this document refers to URIs following the = syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986.  Relative URIs, having = syntax following that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with = WebFinger.

 

Is that clear?

 

Paul

 

From:= = Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com]
Sent: = Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: = webfinger
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs = URI

 

 

 

On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> = wrote:

In not suggesting we use or allow relative = URIs. The immediate question would be "relative to what". I = think the URIs should be absolute, but not following the syntax of = "absolute-URI", but instead just following = "URI".

Yes, = that's a good question.  Generally relative URIs are relative to = the document, but they need not be.  For example they could be = relative by default to the [supposed] webfinger registry.  In JSON = LD they have a @context variable which allows quite a bit of flexibility = in this regard.  I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered a must = in standards based serialization (I suspect not) but they have the = advantage of slightly increased data = portability.

 

Paul

 

From:= = Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Sent: Mon = Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013


To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>

Cc: = webfinger <webfinger@ietf.org>


Subje= ct: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs = URI

 

 

 

 

On 22 = July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Folks,

One of the requirements in the JRD spec = is that certain URIs (e.g., those
identifying link relation types and = properties) be "absolute URIs".  This
term has been a = point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a
concrete = meaning, namely this:

     absolute-URI  =3D = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ]

And the = term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS = XRD
specification.  However, it was not clear to me whether that = referred to the
above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are = not relative URIs
(i.e., those lacking a scheme specified).

I = had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham.  I believe = the
intent of that language was not to require the above constrained = syntax,
but to require the standard URI syntax:

    =  URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ = "#" fragment ]

 

There are many ways that people do this, = see:

http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-= pieces

 


Given = that understanding, I believe we should remove the word = "absolute"
that appears in front of "URI" in the = WebFinger spec.  Do others have an
opinion on = this?

 

+1 on allowing relative = URIs

 


Paul


___________________________________= ____________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 

 

------=_NextPart_000_0328_01CE86C3.A0A27870-- From ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com Mon Jul 22 07:34:27 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7B4211E80F2 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:34:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.528 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.528 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.070, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n00DtlVA25la for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:34:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gg0-f175.google.com (mail-gg0-f175.google.com [209.85.161.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C872421F849C for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:34:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-gg0-f175.google.com with SMTP id q1so2065564ggm.6 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:34:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to:x-mailer:x-gm-message-state; bh=3FcfSoQb6OE4SkUSO/otZ7TRLHtQslomODXnnTfp0WI=; b=oF8D2Nyo9/fEzUjHxu8FALXX5iLPv8RMQRoPXZ4DmpTbUvy0IQBGx3x/tYLG7v+Sia n6mobpAokU3wuk6IfLfJF8+a0BKiutWC3jbqH5BdRXfadDwZvJK9r10i1ZehTMkj8vD0 88Xre/7UBRIfFM65DUh1U6XPBouO4xgeXt3Hs9hcqqVu0fEgiXlRz/whVs664TbwnlJs uFmO+xA87D39JyGvb4AmyLMQfHruhgdb1lwyfVDukzZkbv2jYyE/vb5bh7LwtQ2riQXN +cmg28d/eIAfzImZyrKoOsjH1pMU/h8Fd6Cr4yPa0rnzHbSAayF765rrncAvfcTTShDr /1ZA== X-Received: by 10.236.53.6 with SMTP id f6mr13297805yhc.222.1374503641005; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:34:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.216] (190-20-16-147.baf.movistar.cl. [190.20.16.147]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id f67sm39358460yhh.9.2013.07.22.07.33.58 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:33:59 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A1751246-5421-46C3-94ED-BB90C8BE5379"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) From: John Bradley In-Reply-To: <032701ce86e5$27b2dff0$77189fd0$@packetizer.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 10:33:25 -0400 Message-Id: <9AA3BB39-01F1-4E73-99BC-C7ECD0D839C7@ve7jtb.com> References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> <0a1140f5-24d9-4be6-aab4-1ae6a3d63c0c@email.android.com> <032701ce86e5$27b2dff0$77189fd0$@packetizer.com> To: "Paul E. Jones" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQka4tD5kauC+NhMZ15rYQexUDCYjPE19EeG4bHgBuSOXxwXPR9XywSqsg4eQV8KuKJPzv6m Cc: 'webfinger' , 'Melvin Carvalho' Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:34:28 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_A1751246-5421-46C3-94ED-BB90C8BE5379 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_3284B4C6-78E5-4B49-B0EB-17291695E03E" --Apple-Mail=_3284B4C6-78E5-4B49-B0EB-17291695E03E Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Yes +1. On 2013-07-22, at 10:10 AM, "Paul E. Jones" = wrote: > Melvin, > =20 > It=92s easy enough to replace strings in URIs should data need to be = ported. I suggest we remove the word =93absolute=94 where we currently = have =93absolute URI=94 and then introduce a new paragraph in the = terminology section as follows: > =20 > The use of URIs throughout this document refers to URIs following the = syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986. Relative URIs, having syntax = following that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger. > =20 > Is that clear? > =20 > Paul > =20 > From: Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com]=20 > Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM > To: Paul E. Jones > Cc: webfinger > Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI > =20 > =20 > =20 >=20 > On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones wrote: > In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate = question would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be = absolute, but not following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead = just following "URI". >=20 > Yes, that's a good question. Generally relative URIs are relative to = the document, but they need not be. For example they could be relative = by default to the [supposed] webfinger registry. In JSON LD they have a = @context variable which allows quite a bit of flexibility in this = regard. I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered a must in standards = based serialization (I suspect not) but they have the advantage of = slightly increased data portability. > =20 > Paul >=20 > =20 >=20 > From: Melvin Carvalho > Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013 >=20 > To: "Paul E. Jones" > Cc: webfinger >=20 > Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI > =20 > =20 > =20 > =20 > On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones wrote: > Folks, >=20 > One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., = those > identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". = This > term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to = have a > concrete meaning, namely this: >=20 > absolute-URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] >=20 > And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD > specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred = to the > above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs > (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). >=20 > I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the > intent of that language was not to require the above constrained = syntax, > but to require the standard URI syntax: >=20 > URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] > =20 > There are many ways that people do this, see: >=20 > http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces > =20 >=20 > Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word = "absolute" > that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have = an > opinion on this? > =20 > +1 on allowing relative URIs > =20 >=20 > Paul >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > =20 > =20 > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger --Apple-Mail=_3284B4C6-78E5-4B49-B0EB-17291695E03E Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Yes +1.

On = 2013-07-22, at 10:10 AM, "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> = wrote:

 
It=92s easy enough to replace strings in URIs = should data need to be ported.  I suggest we remove the word = =93absolute=94 where we currently have =93absolute URI=94 and then = introduce a new paragraph in the terminology section as = follows:
 
The use of URIs throughout this document = refers to URIs following the syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC = 3986.  Relative URIs, having syntax following that of Section 4.2 = or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger.
 
Is that = clear?
 
Paul
 
From: Melvin Carvalho = [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 = AM
To: Paul = E. Jones
Cc: webfinger
Subject:<= span class=3D"Apple-converted-space"> Re: [webfinger] = Absolute URI vs URI
 
 

 

On = 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> = wrote:

In not = suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate question would = be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be absolute, but not = following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead just following = "URI".

Yes, that's a = good question.  Generally relative URIs are relative to the = document, but they need not be.  For example they could be relative = by default to the [supposed] webfinger registry.  In JSON LD they = have a @context variable which allows quite a bit of flexibility in this = regard.  I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered a must in = standards based serialization (I suspect not) but they have the = advantage of slightly increased data = portability.

Paul

 

On 22 July = 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones <Folks,

One of the requirements in the JRD = spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those
identifying link relation = types and properties) be "absolute URIs".  This
term has been a = point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a
concrete = meaning, namely this:

     absolute-URI  =3D = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ]

And the term is used, because = that's the term used in the OASIS XRD
specification.  However, = it was not clear to me whether that referred to the
above (which I = assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs
(i.e., those = lacking a scheme specified).

I had an exchange with Eran Hammer = and Mark Nottingham.  I believe the
intent of that language was = not to require the above constrained syntax,
but to require the = standard URI syntax:

     URI =3D scheme ":" = hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.i= etf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

= --Apple-Mail=_3284B4C6-78E5-4B49-B0EB-17291695E03E-- --Apple-Mail=_A1751246-5421-46C3-94ED-BB90C8BE5379 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=smime.p7s Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name=smime.p7s Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIN8TCCBjQw ggQcoAMCAQICASAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwfTELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0 Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxKTAn BgNVBAMTIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTA3MTAyNDIxMDI1NVoX DTE3MTAyNDIxMDI1NVowgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSsw KQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFy dENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMsohUWcASz7GfKrpTOMKqANy9BV7V0igWdGxA8IU77L3aTxErQ+ fcxtDYZ36Z6GH0YFn7fq5RADteP0AYzrCA+EQTfi8q1+kA3m0nwtwXG94M5sIqsvs7lRP1aycBke /s5g9hJHryZ2acScnzczjBCAo7X1v5G3yw8MDP2m2RCye0KfgZ4nODerZJVzhAlOD9YejvAXZqHk sw56HzElVIoYSZ3q4+RJuPXXfIoyby+Y2m1E+YzX5iCZXBx05gk6MKAW1vaw4/v2OOLy6FZH3XHH tOkzUreG//CsFnB9+uaYSlR65cdGzTsmoIK8WH1ygoXhRBm98SD7Hf/r3FELNvUCAwEAAaOCAa0w ggGpMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgEGMB0GA1UdDgQWBBSuVYNv7DHKufcd +q9rMfPIHeOsuzAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBROC+8apEBbpRdphzDKNGhD0EGu8jBmBggrBgEFBQcBAQRa MFgwJwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGG2h0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jYTAtBggrBgEFBQcwAoYh aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vc2ZzY2EuY3J0MFsGA1UdHwRUMFIwJ6AloCOGIWh0dHA6 Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3Nmc2NhLmNybDAnoCWgI4YhaHR0cDovL2NybC5zdGFydHNzbC5j b20vc2ZzY2EuY3JsMIGABgNVHSAEeTB3MHUGCysGAQQBgbU3AQIBMGYwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwNAYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKGh0dHA6Ly93d3cu c3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2ludGVybWVkaWF0ZS5wZGYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggIBADqpJw3I07QW ke9plNBpxUxcffc7nUrIQpJHDci91DFG7fVhHRkMZ1J+BKg5UNUxIFJ2Z9B90Micc/NXcs7kPBRd n6XGO/vPc87Y6R+cWS9Nc9+fp3Enmsm94OxOwI9wn8qnr/6o3mD4noP9JphwUPTXwHovjavRnhUQ HLfo/i2NG0XXgTHXS2Xm0kVUozXqpYpAdumMiB/vezj1QHQJDmUdPYMcp+reg9901zkyT3fDW/iv JVv6pWtkh6Pw2ytZT7mvg7YhX3V50Nv860cV11mocUVcqBLv0gcT+HBDYtbuvexNftwNQKD5193A 7zN4vG7CTYkXxytSjKuXrpEatEiFPxWgb84nVj25SU5q/r1Xhwby6mLhkbaXslkVtwEWT3Van49r KjlK4XrUKYYWtnfzq6aSak5u0Vpxd1rY79tWhD3EdCvOhNz/QplNa+VkIsrcp7+8ZhP1l1b2U6Ma xIVteuVMD3X0vziIwr7jxYae9FZjbxlpUemqXjcC0QaFfN7qI0JsQMALL7iGRBg7K0CoOBzECdD3 fuZil5kU/LP9cr1BK31U0Uy651bFnAMMMkqhAChIbn0ei72VnbpSsrrSdF0BAGYQ8vyHae5aCg+H 75dVCV33K6FuxZrf09yTz+Vx/PkdRUYkXmZz/OTfyJXsUOUXrym6KvI2rYpccSk5MIIHtTCCBp2g AwIBAgICHlwwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENv bSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYD VQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTAeFw0x MjAzMTgwNDMyNDhaFw0xNDAzMTkxMTA3MzJaMIGbMRkwFwYDVQQNExBHclRNNkxTN1gzNTc3OHM5 MQswCQYDVQQGEwJDTDEiMCAGA1UECBMZTWV0cm9wb2xpdGFuYSBkZSBTYW50aWFnbzEWMBQGA1UE BxMNSXNsYSBkZSBNYWlwbzEVMBMGA1UEAxMMSm9obiBCcmFkbGV5MR4wHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFg9q YnJhZGxleUBtZS5jb20wggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQCySuUEj3esFMs5 AZLAhPpyjp0DD+vAM+tFeXr8XahzgoOf5A3oJ0V4ejTwfzjpUlL0IOMsq+cr2NvHGzjBip6cp09v eODO3yhztv1le1aQ6CzGAx/p0Fn8g+biVYGkJtKvex4MYNcSmITaVNleejtzbk6C5HgTpBqFykcA FmN4RYrrmYwfbmCahF/kxjWTeq67nL4UJgIcTaLBTmPOr6YjceYbn35QwUvHV+NX7NOyVHDbpxAM L+56nCN5hKnxLbqF9aKlVbBCPiOz8LtGg+2+3aLJ5T4tIfzWMbjCUBae2I4bVa2hdS5dZJwTGFyI p4pYKd6bL2qqbFF8moFE54aVAgMBAAGjggQOMIIECjAJBgNVHRMEAjAAMAsGA1UdDwQEAwIEsDAd BgNVHSUEFjAUBggrBgEFBQcDAgYIKwYBBQUHAwQwHQYDVR0OBBYEFD8Dv8LEoSfOmqZmUvP2JpAz Lbh5MB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFK5Vg2/sMcq59x36r2sx88gd46y7MH4GA1UdEQR3MHWBD2picmFkbGV5 QG1lLmNvbYEPamJyYWRsZXlAbWUuY29tgRBqYnJhZGxleUBtYWMuY29tgRF2ZTdqdGJAdmU3anRi LmNvbYETamJyYWRsZXlAd2luZ2FhLmNvbYEXam9obi5icmFkbGV5QHdpbmdhYS5jb20wggIhBgNV HSAEggIYMIICFDCCAhAGCysGAQQBgbU3AQICMIIB/zAuBggrBgEFBQcCARYiaHR0cDovL3d3dy5z dGFydHNzbC5jb20vcG9saWN5LnBkZjA0BggrBgEFBQcCARYoaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5j b20vaW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjCB9wYIKwYBBQUHAgIwgeowJxYgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNh dGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwAwIBARqBvlRoaXMgY2VydGlmaWNhdGUgd2FzIGlzc3VlZCBhY2NvcmRp bmcgdG8gdGhlIENsYXNzIDIgVmFsaWRhdGlvbiByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29t IENBIHBvbGljeSwgcmVsaWFuY2Ugb25seSBmb3IgdGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHB1cnBvc2UgaW4gY29t cGxpYW5jZSBvZiB0aGUgcmVseWluZyBwYXJ0eSBvYmxpZ2F0aW9ucy4wgZwGCCsGAQUFBwICMIGP MCcWIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MAMCAQIaZExpYWJpbGl0eSBhbmQg d2FycmFudGllcyBhcmUgbGltaXRlZCEgU2VlIHNlY3Rpb24gIkxlZ2FsIGFuZCBMaW1pdGF0aW9u cyIgb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENBIHBvbGljeS4wNgYDVR0fBC8wLTAroCmgJ4YlaHR0cDovL2Ny bC5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vY3J0dTItY3JsLmNybDCBjgYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgYEwfzA5BggrBgEFBQcw AYYtaHR0cDovL29jc3Auc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3N1Yi9jbGFzczIvY2xpZW50L2NhMEIGCCsGAQUF BzAChjZodHRwOi8vYWlhLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jZXJ0cy9zdWIuY2xhc3MyLmNsaWVudC5jYS5j cnQwIwYDVR0SBBwwGoYYaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IB AQARx8Pg+Yetf5bfNo/8qxHiDAsAvRRNozPXhIieDpr0XeRvxkNtNSd5L25uCmp4lA/YgVzRTmBC cndd4Ifqn0jzya+bU2opDDxa9+CVLRohLX29+lOBclI90g7Ykk9GpoG1d/fOR1cnByRf3900yssZ 4a9oVP19Q11B0dTgEjWlVSmAqvv3pPstNz8RF8fyIWnX4KZ1WQnpjaIl1ZSniHXteZvFshPQJ1Lh JKT9VbwsWyf+ZXPqEHvdW2HCMawiS7nhanilG6rUpf6kBOdGTekdFrXPebEkyars4RcQ1wJWb5sC fJSthtSKU1L1RVNhLz/d1WwqI26kFo5k7686AmpUMYIDbDCCA2gCAQEwgZMwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYT AklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0 aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJt ZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQQICHlwwCQYFKw4DAhoFAKCCAa0wGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3 DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNMTMwNzIyMTQzMzI1WjAjBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxFgQUSZvjabpZ E2S6ngKtYMg0Swq9B7MwgaQGCSsGAQQBgjcQBDGBljCBkzCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNV BAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNp Z25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMTL1N0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDIgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUgQ2xp ZW50IENBAgIeXDCBpgYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAgsxgZaggZMwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQK Ew1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWdu aW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVu dCBDQQICHlwwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAEggEAPIdfjFU8UWONzPrOJsD9TKWFfk8ZSi/QF4gBx+O8 ssgyLXFwyhcGNEQjyxTCmshrKhe8ktRBa8WzJAzR1NzVtw1jNMPMChrMgJ+AZtlF5pv2RZDpYdR9 RNvUcnYKtaE/rSBgLgqqyc2Zye5hdbl9KLb4G2erLgD+CnTv29yn9A4SThNT78dbORaTdTq99qVI nOfymbk8oDAgeCA3lRKmF+iluKrvKIHE3mytG7o5mZCKvQSbkpfQ6kHRZzJ1CbXgVCGwSluii5YN xXT8KjR+EmjPo/j9X+4p687mekWRkKftfNlZMp0yfKGTEQnKOLPZcnhOLDwRRkdypIKrkrU1+wAA AAAAAA== --Apple-Mail=_A1751246-5421-46C3-94ED-BB90C8BE5379-- From nick@silverbucket.net Mon Jul 22 08:01:10 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0A4911E80F2 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:01:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tEogwtpeMyI4 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:01:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-f54.google.com (mail-la0-f54.google.com [209.85.215.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30FF311E80AE for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:01:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f54.google.com with SMTP id ec20so5225345lab.41 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:01:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=okpnbGIl5cdDP7tYMpB61TyyOz9Y3mLsEjWTGqIcItI=; b=SsbRNLeT5vToRR/DliFNJGYkrASY6PdkkH23KojalmBlF94M70uEbSXv4OJQAehIe0 w28eLejxKfznCdZap0fhlvLzrfLyV6hsioEvDC4lGhH6rSUuF3/MXyCLXXcccJor1ZRt ruAxp5p7apSi7nFqz4MsyCNEElrCuE+Ygu1518LwJxFYmeol3xdtOhSPV9bgeaBwPQ8Y 8bVHA+zjb/UmPmPagYICn1a1sf1nzxGbRNSvTgSIKt0d7HkxaQdYgXgrk/5gfgy2GBGA rYlINw/hScHCj+u1ev/LMlXjCxmMYWRixv2Aj5M2t54C76B/ZSyEEz6L3oI7miJPFtrW LS9w== X-Received: by 10.152.4.163 with SMTP id l3mr12741399lal.60.1374505264088; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:01:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x231.google.com (mail-la0-x231.google.com [2a00:1450:4010:c03::231]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id 8sm11111725lbq.4.2013.07.22.08.01.02 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:01:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f49.google.com with SMTP id ea20so5282880lab.36 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:01:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.152.22.42 with SMTP id a10mr13029012laf.30.1374505262379; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:01:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.73.239 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:00:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> From: Nick Jennings Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:00:32 +0200 Message-ID: To: Tim Bray Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0158b794e7fbae04e21af1e2 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQknpLI1yiVythB8VaYMxrAVbANUX1Yxea/Z6bzdH6S60uIF6BRUD9B65yOUd+UX/czHWB0F Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 15:01:10 -0000 --089e0158b794e7fbae04e21af1e2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 6:37 AM, Tim Bray wrote: > 538> curl ' > http://silverbucket.net/.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:nick@silverbucket.net > ' > curl: (7) couldn't connect to host > Hi Tim, thanks for the heads up. I'm running the dev branch of haproxy and it's not quite stable yet :) restarted, should all work now. --089e0158b794e7fbae04e21af1e2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 6:37 AM, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com= > wrote:

Hi Tim, thanks for the heads up. I'm running the dev branch of ha= proxy and it's not quite stable yet :) restarted, should all work now.<= br>
--089e0158b794e7fbae04e21af1e2-- From paulej@packetizer.com Mon Jul 22 11:25:14 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 295EA21F843F for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:25:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MOUtrG3Okmiy for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:25:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F50321F8319 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:25:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6MIP7r2006494 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:25:08 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1374517508; bh=HipMylVhkImSjAtrvvTDwvZLmBUdDyuEDIhvZEZoQrU=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=MCnV534bq0PFkVI5vrwKsG44ICnRxW6Ye7HXezxc5CBma8Om2GsRyakRcDW81nt2M dtMoDSTTjCCYyhKc6qosuPZvkOsC+wAWY9ylsjBd1atyHEVmTFuUu3urC3vCUQI1Ph T7tjgdJdIkZkU5faOeX3i9VPWVsG39kCA/h37ikE= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Edmund Jay'" , , "'Tim Bray'" References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:25:10 -0400 Message-ID: <03b801ce8708$cd5a2c10$680e8430$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_03B9_01CE86E7.464AAEF0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQL/r+No/hn+Dxq4/2ORfMNzEE5vjgGfjNBBAk5SfHcBYrYgdgKGwE2GAVKR0D+WxWGwwA== Content-Language: en-us Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 18:25:14 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_03B9_01CE86E7.464AAEF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Edmund, =20 Note that we removed the =E2=80=9Cexpires=E2=80=9D header from the = current WebFinger spec. It=E2=80=99s OK to have it there, but it should = be ignored by recipients. =20 Paul =20 From: Edmund Jay [mailto:ejay@mgi1.com]=20 Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 2:15 PM To: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs =20 The following can be used :=20 =20 alice@connect.openid4.us or bob@connect.openid4.us =20 -- Edmund _____ =20 From: Mike Jones To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" = ; Tim Bray = ; Paul E. Jones =20 Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" =20 Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs =20 Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post = specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for = testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger? =20 Thanks all, -- Mike =20 From: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com = [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Jones Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs =20 See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID = providers, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger. =20 -- Mike =20 From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf Of Tim Bray Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs =20 Got an OpenID Connect provider? = rel=3Dhttp://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer =20 On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones = wrote: Tim, =20 You=E2=80=99re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / = xmpp:=20 =20 Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but = it should be properly formatted. =20 I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the = acct: reply. I=E2=80=99m happy to throw something in if you want to = check a particular response. =20 Paul =20 From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf Of Tim Bray Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM To: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs =20 Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains = to test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T =20 --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google = Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send = an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. =20 =20 --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google = Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send = an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. =20 =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_03B9_01CE86E7.464AAEF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Edmund,

 

Note that we removed the =E2=80=9Cexpires=E2=80=9D header from the = current WebFinger spec.=C2=A0 It=E2=80=99s OK to have it there, but it = should be ignored by recipients.

 

Paul

 

From:= = Edmund Jay [mailto:ejay@mgi1.com]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 = 2:15 PM
To: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; = Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: = [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

= The following can be used : 

=  

=  

= -- Edmund

F= rom: = Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
To: "openid-connect-in= terop@googlegroups.com" <openid-connect-in= terop@googlegroups.com>; Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>; Paul = E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> =
Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org> =
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM
Subject: RE: = [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Could those of you with OpenID = OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e-mail = address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery = using WebFinger?

 

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       Thanks all,

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       -- Mike

 

From: openid-connect-in= terop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-con= nect-interop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike = Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM
To: Tim = Bray; Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-in= terop@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking = for JRDs

 

See http://osis.idcom= mons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most = of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger.

 

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       -- Mike

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM
To: = Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: = [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=3Dhttp://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer

 

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones = <paulej@packetizer.com> = wrote:

Tim,

 

You=E2=80=99re welcome to test = my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp:

 

Most of what is returned is = just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly = formatted.

 

I have aliases, properties, = titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.  I=E2=80=99m = happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular = response.

 

Paul

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: = webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: [webfinger] = Looking for JRDs

<= p class=3DMsoNormal style=3D'background:white'> 

Working on some WF code... looking for some = candidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling.  Suggestions? = -T

 

--
You received this message because you are = subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" = group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from = it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com= .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 =
 

--
You = received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups = "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this = group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openi= d-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, = visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 =
 

 

------=_NextPart_000_03B9_01CE86E7.464AAEF0-- From tbray@textuality.com Mon Jul 22 11:37:13 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DED821F8717 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:37:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KsP1KjweTPr8 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:37:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ve0-f170.google.com (mail-ve0-f170.google.com [209.85.128.170]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8B9911E80D2 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:37:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ve0-f170.google.com with SMTP id 14so5350834vea.15 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:37:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=KlB9HF6a9a07YwOGDer8UMH6IhdSGnnl5WH/uNR+lvg=; b=JVrh1LOMtB7e/bhAqSqFfW1kNibA2WvMfqZ6Xk4esGX2pX0H0Z75Sm6tMc4P65LrNQ eiKhhskHfRWJ0SPx5ChTB/lBawk84m4ialCVsYd9jTVuzORQ2XP7+I9LKWfyTljUn5KY VUXF+HGzxoz1pJmCLEjU561mFSkslarrjPibpj2waKjZyX2LQsQtLX/iouIZuQHpAFGu bWjhy2HntbX/pXlS0WQqB67Xh64UUNNzNR4tbZwW3fWKALZLugNhpuy3F16xoudhsJzm dO2klVTZJSeCYvZRSolXO8/qeggC6nPkk06uUAqrBnArrhsFxacgnbr+MIrLFljZ5Vge eXfQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.221.36.4 with SMTP id sy4mr9886499vcb.11.1374518224109; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:37:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.219.200 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:37:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [96.49.81.176] In-Reply-To: <03b801ce8708$cd5a2c10$680e8430$@packetizer.com> References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <03b801ce8708$cd5a2c10$680e8430$@packetizer.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:37:04 -0700 Message-ID: From: Tim Bray To: "Paul E. Jones" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11339f387c55a104e21df6ab X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmJfWJSl/mWxPJdXIkGaMQIxhNM/++zwGlIdHJIoyd+b/bdxy9CJ+uMSm9e551fwX/+rC2S Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" , openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com, Edmund Jay Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 18:37:13 -0000 --001a11339f387c55a104e21df6ab Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hm? You mean the HTTP Expires header? Why should recipients act in a non-HTTP-standard way? I don=E2=80=99t think we=E2=80=99re allowed to rewr= ite HTTP rules. -T On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Paul E. Jones wrot= e: > Edmund,**** > > ** ** > > Note that we removed the =E2=80=9Cexpires=E2=80=9D header from the curren= t WebFinger > spec. It=E2=80=99s OK to have it there, but it should be ignored by reci= pients.** > ** > > ** ** > > Paul**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Edmund Jay [mailto:ejay@mgi1.com] > *Sent:* Monday, July 22, 2013 2:15 PM > *To:* openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org > > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > ** ** > > The following can be used : **** > > **** > > alice@connect.openid4.us or**** > > bob@connect.openid4.us**** > > ** ** > > -- Edmund**** > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Mike Jones > *To:* "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" < > openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com>; Tim Bray = ; > Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* "webfinger@ietf.org" > *Sent:* Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM > *Subject:* RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > ** ** > > Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post > specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for > testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger?**** > > **** > > Thanks all,**= * > * > > -- Mike**** > > **** > > *From:* openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [ > mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] > *On Behalf Of *Mike Jones > *Sent:* Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM > *To:* Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com > *Subject:* RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > **** > > See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID > providers, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger.**** > > **** > > -- Mike**** > > **** > > *From:* webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] > *On Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM > *To:* Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > **** > > Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=3D > http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer**** > > **** > > On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones > wrote:**** > > Tim,**** > > **** > > You=E2=80=99re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / = xmpp: *** > * > > **** > > Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it > should be properly formatted.**** > > **** > > I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: > reply. I=E2=80=99m happy to throw something in if you want to check a pa= rticular > response.**** > > **** > > Paul**** > > **** > > *From:* webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] *O= n > Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM > *To:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > **** > > Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains t= o > test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T**** > > **** > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "OpenID Connect Interop" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > **** > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "OpenID Connect Interop" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > **** > > ** ** > --001a11339f387c55a104e21df6ab Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hm?=C2=A0 You mean the HTTP Expires header?=C2=A0 Why shou= ld recipients act in a non-HTTP-standard way?=C2=A0 I don=E2=80=99t think w= e=E2=80=99re allowed to rewrite HTTP rules.=C2=A0 -T


On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com= > wrote:

Edmund,

=C2=A0

Note that we removed the =E2=80=9Cexpires= =E2=80=9D header from the current WebFinger spec.=C2=A0 It=E2=80=99s OK to = have it there, but it should be ignored by recipients.=

=C2=A0

Paul<= /span>

=C2=A0

From: Edmund Jay [mailto:ejay@mgi1.com]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 2:15 PM
To: openid-connect-i= nterop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org


Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs=

=C2=A0

The following can be used :=C2=A0

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

-- Edmund

From: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft= .com>
To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" <= openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com>; Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>; = Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: "we= bfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 20, = 2013 10:51 PM
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs<= u>

=C2=A0

Could those of you with Open= ID OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e-mail= address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery using= WebFinger?

=C2=A0

=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Thanks all,

=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0 -- Mike

=C2=A0

From: openi= d-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-interop@goo= glegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM
To: Tim Bray; Paul E= . Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs<= u>

=C2=A0

See http://osis.idcommons.= net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most of which = implement Discovery, including WebFinger.<= /span>

=C2=A0

=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -- Mike

=C2=A0

From: webfin= ger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of T= im Bray
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM
To: Paul E. Jones
<= b>Cc: webfinger= @ietf.org
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

= =C2=A0

Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=3Dhttp:= //openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer

=C2=A0

O= n Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Tim,

=C2=A0<= u>

You=E2=80=99re welcome to test my addresse= s, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp:

=C2=A0

Most of what is returned is just test d= ata (though some is valid), but it should be properly formatted.

=C2=A0

I have aliases, properties, titles= , and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.=C2=A0 I=E2=80=99m happy to t= hrow something in if you want to check a particular response.

=C2=A0

Paul<= /u>

=C2=A0

From: webfin= ger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of T= im Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject:= [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

=C2=A0

Working on some WF code...= looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling.=C2=A0 = Suggestions? -T

=C2=A0

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups = "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
=C2=A0=
=C2=A0

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to = the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscri= be from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
=C2=A0=
=C2=A0

=C2=A0


--001a11339f387c55a104e21df6ab-- From paulej@packetizer.com Mon Jul 22 11:46:51 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB42021F8FDC for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:46:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZWxy4kNPoIsX for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:46:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C9F221F94DC for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:46:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6MIkjqS007827 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:46:45 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1374518805; bh=v28WBvNX4pmpugvUcEd4zXeJadgEaJrSeVch5vzjvHI=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=QgcXwQ2Mxe0LMCHuMqt2IYTqZ380Ce8Y++q0iP/vocucJBrgB+UHKZ4LDT/ReIwFl 2PVy4/4zhxWnszjXjZWMor9HN3MBVsesmhuG3OQdADwux/T12C21RQpPymyOgqVui7 ntTTXIqMTcozNkdnVoVXihCIIsCzGfT1c2Z3+mi4= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Tim Bray'" References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <03b801ce8708$cd5a2c10$680e8430$@packetizer.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:46:48 -0400 Message-ID: <03e901ce870b$d2a8f040$77fad0c0$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_03EA_01CE86EA.4B994C10" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQL/r+No/hn+Dxq4/2ORfMNzEE5vjgGfjNBBAk5SfHcBYrYgdgKGwE2GAVKR0D8CE3h2fQIi07aRlqO2HAA= Content-Language: en-us Cc: webfinger@ietf.org, openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com, 'Edmund Jay' Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 18:46:52 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_03EA_01CE86EA.4B994C10 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sorry=E2=80=A6 I meant the =E2=80=9Cexpires=E2=80=9D member of the JRD = returned has been removed. Obviously, we cannot remove the HTTP header = ;-) =20 Paul =20 =20 From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@textuality.com]=20 Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 2:37 PM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: Edmund Jay; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; = webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs =20 Hm? You mean the HTTP Expires header? Why should recipients act in a = non-HTTP-standard way? I don=E2=80=99t think we=E2=80=99re allowed to = rewrite HTTP rules. -T =20 On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Paul E. Jones = wrote: Edmund, =20 Note that we removed the =E2=80=9Cexpires=E2=80=9D header from the = current WebFinger spec. It=E2=80=99s OK to have it there, but it should = be ignored by recipients. =20 Paul =20 From: Edmund Jay [mailto:ejay@mgi1.com]=20 Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 2:15 PM To: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs =20 The following can be used :=20 =20 alice@connect.openid4.us or bob@connect.openid4.us =20 -- Edmund _____ =20 From: Mike Jones To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" = ; Tim Bray = ; Paul E. Jones =20 Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" =20 Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs =20 Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post = specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for = testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger? =20 Thanks all, -- Mike =20 From: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com = [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Jones Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs =20 See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID = providers, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger. =20 -- Mike =20 From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf Of Tim Bray Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs =20 Got an OpenID Connect provider? = rel=3Dhttp://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer =20 On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones = wrote: Tim, =20 You=E2=80=99re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / = xmpp:=20 =20 Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but = it should be properly formatted. =20 I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the = acct: reply. I=E2=80=99m happy to throw something in if you want to = check a particular response. =20 Paul =20 From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf Of Tim Bray Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM To: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs =20 Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains = to test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T =20 --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google = Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send = an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. =20 =20 --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google = Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send = an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. =20 =20 =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_03EA_01CE86EA.4B994C10 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Sorry=E2=80=A6 I meant the =E2=80=9Cexpires=E2=80=9D member of the = JRD returned has been removed.=C2=A0 Obviously, we cannot remove the = HTTP header ;-)

 

Paul

 

 

From:= = Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@textuality.com]
Sent: Monday, July 22, = 2013 2:37 PM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: Edmund Jay; = openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; = webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for = JRDs

 

Hm?  You mean the HTTP Expires header?  Why = should recipients act in a non-HTTP-standard way?  I don=E2=80=99t = think we=E2=80=99re allowed to rewrite HTTP rules.  = -T

 

On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> = wrote:

Edmund,

 

Note that we removed the =E2=80=9Cexpires=E2=80=9D header from the = current WebFinger spec.  It=E2=80=99s OK to have it there, but it = should be ignored by recipients.

 

Paul

 

From:= = Edmund Jay [mailto:ejay@mgi1.com]
Sent: Monday, July 22, = 2013 2:15 PM
To: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; = Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org

<= p class=3DMsoNormal>
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for = JRDs

 <= /o:p>

The = following can be used : 

 

<= div>

 

-- = Edmund

From:<= /b> = Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
To: = "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" = <openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com>; Tim = Bray <tbray@textuality.com>; Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, = July 20, 2013 10:51 PM
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for = JRDs

 

Could those of you = with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers = using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based = discovery using WebFinger?

 

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       Thanks = all,

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       -- = Mike

 

From: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] = On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 = 4:34 PM
To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com
Subje= ct: RE: [webfinger] Looking for = JRDs

 

See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for = a list of OpenID providers, most of which implement Discovery, including = WebFinger.

 

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       -- = Mike

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM
To: = Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: = [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=3Dhttp://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer

 

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> = wrote:

Tim,

=

 

You=E2=80=99re = welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: =

 

Most of what is = returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be = properly formatted.

 

I have aliases, = properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.  = I=E2=80=99m happy to throw something in if you want to check a = particular response.

 

Paul

=

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: = webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: [webfinger] = Looking for JRDs

 

Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate = addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling.  Suggestions? = -T

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the = Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To = unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an = email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com= .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 =
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the = Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To = unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an = email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com= .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 =
 

&= nbsp;

 

------=_NextPart_000_03EA_01CE86EA.4B994C10-- From barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com Mon Jul 22 13:30:08 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B8B221F8CB0 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:30:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wmSSFDJbqjrT for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:30:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vc0-x22d.google.com (mail-vc0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0D8321F8C7C for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:30:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vc0-f173.google.com with SMTP id hz10so1422856vcb.4 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:30:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=vV0Ra7gvZygzX27pcPrYQ4Tsq51GuVVRJlAAcBpG2z0=; b=gCVEAXRMirGRq7eWmWJbhzqCL5SNgHCckE9ypKUIpvhPvlu2dLx+ZdG80RkTLQgeFe AAb+B9bPFow/oZfOZW/0vWli1ngfQ7XzDZdt1u69Ka5HUSRSB9HKMUPCYZipjsH6TZLQ vOK+9StznVStCXz4aYYDOFxdpc9JhJzoy/4dySBmX7/PAl5tLwsmJz3tC1+zCHSw3fEr 4Sm24S6gXjD42pSSQKuDWmH9ZSeoiJSN/m+2iNxnxn/LImxhNo/3R/ehQ9pF7HYsFXbV 3snLiIPCu16vUsOE+LZvEHgsEpnelWqTu6w+mAvkE2fatuKutIqunX13xMGfkf5nZdRy eUow== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.181.69 with SMTP id bx5mr9782994vcb.71.1374525005236; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:30:05 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com Received: by 10.58.137.227 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:30:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.137.227 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:30:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <028301ce869f$596c12a0$0c4437e0$@packetizer.com> References: <028301ce869f$596c12a0$0c4437e0$@packetizer.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 16:30:05 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Jrb9rYoxnEgdEMAuDewWvE3bnss Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: "Paul E. Jones" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1132f30cac0eec04e21f8ac0 Cc: webfinger@ietf.org, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Martin_J=2E_D=FCrst?= Subject: Re: [webfinger] Webfinger and URI vs IRI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:30:08 -0000 --001a1132f30cac0eec04e21f8ac0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I believe WF should only use URIs. I believe that IRIs are a presentation layer thing. Barry On Jul 22, 2013 1:50 AM, "Paul E. Jones" wrote: > Folks, > > The term URI is used almost exclusively in the WebFinger spec, with IRI > appearing only twice (outside of the reference). This is because URI is > used in RFC 6415 almost exclusively. However, RFC 5988 uses the term IRI > in > most of the text. That said, RFC 5988 also says things like the "target > IRI > as a URI-Reference" ... > > I feel like we have a terminology problem and it's not quite clear to me > how > to fix it. Should we change every instance of URI to IRI? Should URI be > used in most places, with IRI discussed specifically somewhere? Or is > there > even a need to mention IRI given that IRIs can be converted to URIs? > > I would really like to get this right, but it definitely does not look > right > now with only one normative use of IRI in section 4.4.4. Who can help me > with this? > > Paul > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > --001a1132f30cac0eec04e21f8ac0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I believe WF should only use URIs.=A0 I believe that IRIs are a presenta= tion layer thing.

Barry

On Jul 22, 2013 1:50 AM, "Paul E. Jones&quo= t; <paulej@packetizer.com&g= t; wrote:
Folks,

The term URI is used almost exclusively in the WebFinger spec, with IRI
appearing only twice (outside of the reference). =A0This is because URI is<= br> used in RFC 6415 almost exclusively. =A0However, RFC 5988 uses the term IRI= in
most of the text. =A0That said, RFC 5988 also says things like the "ta= rget IRI
as a URI-Reference" ...

I feel like we have a terminology problem and it's not quite clear to m= e how
to fix it. =A0Should we change every instance of URI to IRI? =A0Should URI = be
used in most places, with IRI discussed specifically somewhere? =A0Or is th= ere
even a need to mention IRI given that IRIs can be converted to URIs?

I would really like to get this right, but it definitely does not look righ= t
now with only one normative use of IRI in section 4.4.4. =A0Who can help me=
with this?

Paul


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger
--001a1132f30cac0eec04e21f8ac0-- From Michael.Jones@microsoft.com Mon Jul 22 13:36:54 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BE8411E814E for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:36:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f2RzQUjpKgez for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:36:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tx2outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (tx2ehsobe003.messaging.microsoft.com [65.55.88.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AB1211E8123 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:36:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail57-tx2-R.bigfish.com (10.9.14.238) by TX2EHSOBE001.bigfish.com (10.9.40.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.22; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:36:48 +0000 Received: from mail57-tx2 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail57-tx2-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20C9416097B; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:36:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:131.107.125.8; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:TK5EX14HUBC107.redmond.corp.microsoft.com; RD:autodiscover.service.exchange.microsoft.com; EFVD:NLI X-SpamScore: -22 X-BigFish: VS-22(zz98dI9371Ic89bhc85dhzz1f42h208ch1ee6h1de0h1fdah2073h1202h1e76h1d1ah1d2ah1fc6hzz1d7338h1de098h1033IL17326ah18c673h1de097h1de096h8275bh8275dhz2fh2a8h668h839hd25hf0ah1288h12a5h12bdh137ah1441h1504h1537h153bh15d0h162dh1631h1758h18e1h1946h19b5h19ceh1b0ah1bceh1d0ch1d2eh1d3fh1dfeh1dffh1e1dh1155h) Received-SPF: pass (mail57-tx2: domain of microsoft.com designates 131.107.125.8 as permitted sender) client-ip=131.107.125.8; envelope-from=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; helo=TK5EX14HUBC107.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ; icrosoft.com ; Received: from mail57-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail57-tx2 (MessageSwitch) id 1374525406706432_14154; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:36:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TX2EHSMHS020.bigfish.com (unknown [10.9.14.227]) by mail57-tx2.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A81AB2A0056; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:36:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TK5EX14HUBC107.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (131.107.125.8) by TX2EHSMHS020.bigfish.com (10.9.99.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.225.23; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:36:46 +0000 Received: from TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.1.38]) by TK5EX14HUBC107.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.80.67]) with mapi id 14.03.0136.001; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:35:42 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: Barry Leiba , "Paul E. Jones" Thread-Topic: [webfinger] Webfinger and URI vs IRI Thread-Index: Ac6GnLRN4Jk8X/POQYqp7F2LyuxBnQAfYuGAAAAxCDA= Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:35:41 +0000 Message-ID: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6FF6C8@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> References: <028301ce869f$596c12a0$0c4437e0$@packetizer.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.74] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6FF6C8TK5EX14MBXC284r_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Martin_J=2E_D=FCrst?= Subject: Re: [webfinger] Webfinger and URI vs IRI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:36:54 -0000 --_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6FF6C8TK5EX14MBXC284r_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +1 From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Beh= alf Of Barry Leiba Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 1:30 PM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; Martin J. D=FCrst Subject: Re: [webfinger] Webfinger and URI vs IRI I believe WF should only use URIs. I believe that IRIs are a presentation = layer thing. Barry On Jul 22, 2013 1:50 AM, "Paul E. Jones" > wrote: Folks, The term URI is used almost exclusively in the WebFinger spec, with IRI appearing only twice (outside of the reference). This is because URI is used in RFC 6415 almost exclusively. However, RFC 5988 uses the term IRI i= n most of the text. That said, RFC 5988 also says things like the "target IR= I as a URI-Reference" ... I feel like we have a terminology problem and it's not quite clear to me ho= w to fix it. Should we change every instance of URI to IRI? Should URI be used in most places, with IRI discussed specifically somewhere? Or is ther= e even a need to mention IRI given that IRIs can be converted to URIs? I would really like to get this right, but it definitely does not look righ= t now with only one normative use of IRI in section 4.4.4. Who can help me with this? Paul _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger --_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6FF6C8TK5EX14MBXC284r_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

+1<= /p>

 <= /p>

From: webfinge= r-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Barry Leiba
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 1:30 PM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; Martin J. D=FCrst
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Webfinger and URI vs IRI<= /p>

 

I believe WF should only use URIs.  I believe that IRIs are a prese= ntation layer thing.

Barry

On Jul 22, 2013 1:50 AM, "Paul E. Jones" &= lt;paulej@packetizer.com> w= rote:

Folks,

The term URI is used almost exclusively in the WebFinger spec, with IRI
appearing only twice (outside of the reference).  This is because URI = is
used in RFC 6415 almost exclusively.  However, RFC 5988 uses the term = IRI in
most of the text.  That said, RFC 5988 also says things like the "= ;target IRI
as a URI-Reference" ...

I feel like we have a terminology problem and it's not quite clear to me ho= w
to fix it.  Should we change every instance of URI to IRI?  Shoul= d URI be
used in most places, with IRI discussed specifically somewhere?  Or is= there
even a need to mention IRI given that IRIs can be converted to URIs?

I would really like to get this right, but it definitely does not look righ= t
now with only one normative use of IRI in section 4.4.4.  Who can help= me
with this?

Paul


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

--_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6FF6C8TK5EX14MBXC284r_-- From paulej@packetizer.com Mon Jul 22 14:27:53 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A528A11E814F for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:27:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.373 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.373 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.225, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S+mTPhzJeKg6 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:27:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8015F11E813B for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:27:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6MLRexf018055 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:27:40 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1374528460; bh=AyulUL4kMxt7Uoiab56SE58ikgEnv487472wA2+Yupg=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Xv4G7fAFA8DK5q63amdmQ3nMiel7pL4xsTiUkjHz8a13Ct5pEqBgPQD5sjZzF2Z4T yeOBlEHaUHVzv8H0adtJNPw0QQlfsEzQLMK1tTzCUWWNK4FGf1h3c6iPHUYbgBcsos DPJe2Spu4YFocB7nVuJInnTyZ5/jqF14ZfszpDnA= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Barry Leiba'" References: <028301ce869f$596c12a0$0c4437e0$@packetizer.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:27:43 -0400 Message-ID: <042f01ce8722$4d98a410$e8c9ec30$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0430_01CE8700.C68863A0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQJrRQzHVjOxguTsrCrvNh3eaj/JigGXXVV3mCrxRGA= Content-Language: en-us Cc: webfinger@ietf.org, =?GB2312?B?J01hcnRpbiBKLiBEqLlyc3Qn?= Subject: Re: [webfinger] Webfinger and URI vs IRI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 21:27:53 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0430_01CE8700.C68863A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Barry, =20 The reason I raise this is that RFC 5988 refers to the target IRI (the =A1=B0href=A1=B1 in WebFinger link relation) and context IRI (the = =A1=B0subject=A1=B1 and =A1=B0aliases=A1=B1 in WebFinger). Only ASCII is used in some = protocols, so the IRIs must be formatted as URIs. =20 However, JRD is JSON and, therefore, Unicode. Thus, we could easily accommodate links like this: =20 { "rel" : "test2", "href" : "http://example.org/=CB=BD=A4=CE =CE=C4=95=F8.txt" } =20 As opposed this form: =20 { "rel" : "test2", "href" : "http://example.org/%E7%A7%81%E3%81%AE%20%E6%96%87%E6%9B%B8.txt" } =20 I have no strong preference, but the text did have IRI mentioned in one place in the JRD spec section, but it was not consistent through the document. Everywhere else, we specified URI. =20 So, if IRIs are truly only for presentation, then the latter example = above should be what WF servers return. The query target is always a percent-encoded URI, so it=A1=AFs a non-issue. =20 Paul =20 From: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com [mailto:barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Barry Leiba Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:30 PM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: Martin J. D=A8=B9rst; webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Webfinger and URI vs IRI =20 I believe WF should only use URIs. I believe that IRIs are a = presentation layer thing. Barry On Jul 22, 2013 1:50 AM, "Paul E. Jones" wrote: Folks, The term URI is used almost exclusively in the WebFinger spec, with IRI appearing only twice (outside of the reference). This is because URI is used in RFC 6415 almost exclusively. However, RFC 5988 uses the term = IRI in most of the text. That said, RFC 5988 also says things like the "target = IRI as a URI-Reference" ... I feel like we have a terminology problem and it's not quite clear to me = how to fix it. Should we change every instance of URI to IRI? Should URI = be used in most places, with IRI discussed specifically somewhere? Or is = there even a need to mention IRI given that IRIs can be converted to URIs? I would really like to get this right, but it definitely does not look = right now with only one normative use of IRI in section 4.4.4. Who can help = me with this? Paul _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger ------=_NextPart_000_0430_01CE8700.C68863A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Barry,

 

The reason I raise this is that RFC 5988 refers to the target IRI = (the =A1=B0href=A1=B1 in WebFinger link relation) and context IRI (the = =A1=B0subject=A1=B1 and =A1=B0aliases=A1=B1 in WebFinger).  Only = ASCII is used in some protocols, so the IRIs must be formatted as = URIs.

 

However, JRD is JSON and, therefore, Unicode.  Thus, we could = easily accommodate links like this:

 

  {

    "rel" : = "test2",

    "href" : = "http://example.org/=CB=BD=A4=CE<= /span> =CE=C4=95=F8<= /span>.txt"

= }

 

As opposed this form:

 

  {

    "rel" : = "test2",

    "href" : = "http://example.org/%E7%A7%81%E3%81%AE%20%E6%96%87%E6%9B%B8.txt"= ;

= }

 

I have no strong preference, but the text did have IRI mentioned in = one place in the JRD spec section, but it was not consistent through the = document.  Everywhere else, we specified = URI.

 

So, if IRIs are truly only for presentation, then the latter example = above should be what WF servers return.  The query target is always = a percent-encoded URI, so it=A1=AFs a non-issue.

 

Paul

 

From:= = barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com = [mailto:barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Barry = Leiba
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:30 PM
To: Paul = E. Jones
Cc: Martin J. D=A8=B9rst; = webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Webfinger and URI = vs IRI

 

I believe WF should only use = URIs.  I believe that IRIs are a presentation layer = thing.

Barry

On = Jul 22, 2013 1:50 AM, "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> = wrote:

Folks,

The term URI is = used almost exclusively in the WebFinger spec, with IRI
appearing = only twice (outside of the reference).  This is because URI = is
used in RFC 6415 almost exclusively.  However, RFC 5988 uses = the term IRI in
most of the text.  That said, RFC 5988 also says = things like the "target IRI
as a URI-Reference" = ...

I feel like we have a terminology problem and it's not quite = clear to me how
to fix it.  Should we change every instance of = URI to IRI?  Should URI be
used in most places, with IRI = discussed specifically somewhere?  Or is there
even a need to = mention IRI given that IRIs can be converted to URIs?

I would = really like to get this right, but it definitely does not look = right
now with only one normative use of IRI in section 4.4.4. =  Who can help me
with = this?

Paul


____________________________________________= ___
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

------=_NextPart_000_0430_01CE8700.C68863A0-- From barryleiba@gmail.com Mon Jul 22 14:45:12 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A87F611E80D3 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:45:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FZDkh62NJakT for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:45:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qe0-x22e.google.com (mail-qe0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c02::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0DA411E80C5 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:45:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qe0-f46.google.com with SMTP id nd7so4042313qeb.19 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:45:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=8wJq0SR9CXq1peKG5UACKALy3jdy5FWgYDxBujiSXXw=; b=ixTHUiqNS5jqO8qYdEzZNClzxzWtVwWmIw3FN3KBPMUgXiq5F4CN0x+WKWYoS1gjmI qpVoOsaYVKyMuwGBONgd81vs6/wmVY333+MIz/E+O05W/K9AfvZLDXrJ9bndoKDZ++8a 8FfNcKSAqPUXar29BOhkUDM6NZCVfOkg/72zqFDgFeNF+seL+pbLABcxPOjGtHjSA4ru yFypT/RY6CROLPAoDeSHMSrvFvth6O2e8RojJKk+su7szFaVIwltRMtuX/QRjEId0tFu ts8ioQdlDlrXP5vQvvd8dXlZLae4eo9tGUNbV7HZqRwK9syGPgmUsrSvsHBmXtpwcvZQ 70PQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.229.214.202 with SMTP id hb10mr8212803qcb.113.1374529510006; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:45:10 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.224.59.211 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:45:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.59.211 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:45:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <042f01ce8722$4d98a410$e8c9ec30$@packetizer.com> References: <028301ce869f$596c12a0$0c4437e0$@packetizer.com> <042f01ce8722$4d98a410$e8c9ec30$@packetizer.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:45:09 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: vzqtZ5_OyhY-OV978bE4xRjaBiM Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: "Paul E. Jones" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11339b322d662404e2209775 Cc: webfinger@ietf.org, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Martin_J=2E_D=FCrst?= Subject: Re: [webfinger] Webfinger and URI vs IRI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 21:45:13 -0000 --001a11339b322d662404e2209775 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > So, if IRIs are truly only for presentation, then the latter example abov= e > should be what WF servers return. The query target is always a > percent-encoded URI, so it=E2=80=99s a non-issue. Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Barry On Jul 22, 2013 5:27 PM, "Paul E. Jones" wrote: > Barry,**** > > ** ** > > The reason I raise this is that RFC 5988 refers to the target IRI (the > =E2=80=9Chref=E2=80=9D in WebFinger link relation) and context IRI (the = =E2=80=9Csubject=E2=80=9D and > =E2=80=9Caliases=E2=80=9D in WebFinger). Only ASCII is used in some prot= ocols, so the IRIs > must be formatted as URIs.**** > > ** ** > > However, JRD is JSON and, therefore, Unicode. Thus, we could easily > accommodate links like this:**** > > ** ** > > {**** > > "rel" : "test2",**** > > "href" : "http://example.org/=E7=A7=81=E3=81=AE =E6=96=87=E6=9B=B8.tx= t"**** > > }**** > > ** ** > > As opposed this form:**** > > ** ** > > {**** > > "rel" : "test2",**** > > "href" : " > http://example.org/%E7%A7%81%E3%81%AE%20%E6%96%87%E6%9B%B8.txt"**** > > }**** > > ** ** > > I have no strong preference, but the text did have IRI mentioned in one > place in the JRD spec section, but it was not consistent through the > document. Everywhere else, we specified URI.**** > > ** ** > > So, if IRIs are truly only for presentation, then the latter example abov= e > should be what WF servers return. The query target is always a > percent-encoded URI, so it=E2=80=99s a non-issue.**** > > ** ** > > Paul**** > > ** ** > > *From:* barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com [mailto: > barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *Barry Leiba > *Sent:* Monday, July 22, 2013 4:30 PM > *To:* Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* Martin J. D=C3=BCrst; webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Webfinger and URI vs IRI**** > > ** ** > > I believe WF should only use URIs. I believe that IRIs are a presentatio= n > layer thing.**** > > Barry**** > > On Jul 22, 2013 1:50 AM, "Paul E. Jones" wrote:**= * > * > > Folks, > > The term URI is used almost exclusively in the WebFinger spec, with IRI > appearing only twice (outside of the reference). This is because URI is > used in RFC 6415 almost exclusively. However, RFC 5988 uses the term IRI > in > most of the text. That said, RFC 5988 also says things like the "target > IRI > as a URI-Reference" ... > > I feel like we have a terminology problem and it's not quite clear to me > how > to fix it. Should we change every instance of URI to IRI? Should URI be > used in most places, with IRI discussed specifically somewhere? Or is > there > even a need to mention IRI given that IRIs can be converted to URIs? > > I would really like to get this right, but it definitely does not look > right > now with only one normative use of IRI in section 4.4.4. Who can help me > with this? > > Paul > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger**** > --001a11339b322d662404e2209775 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> So, if IRIs are truly only for presentation, then the latter exampl= e above
> should be what WF servers return. The query target is always a
> percent-encoded URI, so it=E2=80=99s a non-issue.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.

Barry

On Jul 22, 2013 5:27 PM, "Paul E. Jones&quo= t; <paulej@packetizer.com&g= t; wrote:

Barry,

=C2=A0

The reason I raise this is that RFC 5988 r= efers to the target IRI (the =E2=80=9Chref=E2=80=9D in WebFinger link relat= ion) and context IRI (the =E2=80=9Csubject=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Caliases=E2= =80=9D in WebFinger).=C2=A0 Only ASCII is used in some protocols, so the IR= Is must be formatted as URIs.

=C2=A0

However, JRD is JSO= N and, therefore, Unicode.=C2=A0 Thus, we could easily accommodate links li= ke this:

=C2=A0

=C2=A0 {

=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0"rel" : "t= est2",

=C2=A0 = =C2=A0=C2=A0"href" : "http://example.org/=E7=A7=81=E3=81=AE =E6=96=87=E6=9B=B8.txt&qu= ot;

}=

=C2=A0

As opposed this form:<= /u>

<= /u>=C2=A0

=C2=A0 {

=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 "rel" : "test2",=

=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 "href" : "= http://example.org/%E7%A7%81%E3%81%AE%20%E6%96%87%E6%9B%B= 8.txt"

}=

=C2=A0<= u>

I have no strong preferen= ce, but the text did have IRI mentioned in one place in the JRD spec sectio= n, but it was not consistent through the document.=C2=A0 Everywhere else, w= e specified URI.

=C2=A0

So, if IRIs are tru= ly only for presentation, then the latter example above should be what WF s= ervers return.=C2=A0 The query target is always a percent-encoded URI, so i= t=E2=80=99s a non-issue.

=C2=A0

Paul<= /span>

=C2=A0

From: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com [mailto:barryleiba.mailing.lists@gma= il.com] On Behalf Of Barry Leiba
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:30 PM
To: Paul E. Jones
<= b>Cc: Martin J. D=C3=BCrst; webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Webf= inger and URI vs IRI

=C2=A0

I believe WF = should only use URIs.=C2=A0 I believe that IRIs are a presentation layer th= ing.

Barry

On Jul 22, 2013 1:50 AM, "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote= :

Folks,

The term URI is used almost exclusivel= y in the WebFinger spec, with IRI
appearing only twice (outside of the r= eference). =C2=A0This is because URI is
used in RFC 6415 almost exclusiv= ely. =C2=A0However, RFC 5988 uses the term IRI in
most of the text. =C2=A0That said, RFC 5988 also says things like the "= ;target IRI
as a URI-Reference" ...

I feel like we have a te= rminology problem and it's not quite clear to me how
to fix it. =C2= =A0Should we change every instance of URI to IRI? =C2=A0Should URI be
used in most places, with IRI discussed specifically somewhere? =C2=A0Or is= there
even a need to mention IRI given that IRIs can be converted to UR= Is?

I would really like to get this right, but it definitely does no= t look right
now with only one normative use of IRI in section 4.4.4. =C2=A0Who can help= me
with this?

Paul


__________________________________= _____________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

--001a11339b322d662404e2209775-- From tbray@textuality.com Mon Jul 22 17:49:18 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77EFB11E81C8 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:49:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cwC7zt5KISJK for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:49:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ve0-f180.google.com (mail-ve0-f180.google.com [209.85.128.180]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B9E211E819E for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:49:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ve0-f180.google.com with SMTP id pa12so5605021veb.11 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:49:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=K5WC7fcTsLDJO+Fs/GkYf+3qWqZMCmwJeozp+Qybbq0=; b=OweAjlZRN/yBBqr4d01i+Ei0VyuqTXXuISUx8umFXUK+EgFnyEwv/4f3MJzxC8UMFz xu5/nMM7PaaJE/aNWUSuDRO3CSMSQbnvaMO+RsvYuK3dLb9KzkBe5lAk/xvLihg8w5VB tyGGICRTPmIKDTTVm3ZFJIbisPMfQhIV9MH8Ir/WB11EsnoR3u6/SEk3/bbPeI7D7v7o PWtt2PGAlZ5auWshUyQsU+VKSaVqTWueecDOV4JV55JX8GmvktUU9wklfo3CBfID48Ga eaZicSK+ClL/UchZD4uEjZKMaQ70YO1FgVOA8n4Xc954XJELCiUMUuQxtXTOVbekXHgc RxMQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.183.70 with SMTP id cf6mr8744724vcb.36.1374540551833; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:49:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.219.200 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:49:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [96.49.81.176] In-Reply-To: <770A1CF6-4290-48E0-AFCC-ED9ED60357DB@adm.umu.se> References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <770A1CF6-4290-48E0-AFCC-ED9ED60357DB@adm.umu.se> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 17:49:11 -0700 Message-ID: From: Tim Bray To: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0149cb805259b004e223297f X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmw3QXZdV2ue9wRTYaQqfElSaAmOEIhXRZjWV8cI3N1N2X0FdNmYyAbgyBYWCGXza30U6Ls Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 00:49:18 -0000 --089e0149cb805259b004e223297f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks for the JRDs, the discovery bit seems to work fine. -T On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Roland Hedberg wrote: > 21 jul 2013 kl. 07:51 skrev Mike Jones : > > > Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post > specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for > testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger? > > diana@xenosmilus2.umdc.umu.se > > -- Roland > "Education is the path from cocky ignorance to miserable uncertainty.=E2= =80=9D - > Mark Twain > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "OpenID Connect Interop" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > --089e0149cb805259b004e223297f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks for the JRDs, the discovery bit seems to work fine.= =C2=A0 -T


On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Roland Hedberg &l= t;roland.hed= berg@adm.umu.se> wrote:
21 jul 2013 kl. 07:51 skrev Mike Jones <<= a href=3D"mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com">Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>:

> Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post = specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for tes= ting e-mail based discovery using WebFinger?

diana@xenosmilus2.umdc.umu= .se

-- Roland
"Education is the path from cocky ignorance to miserable uncertainty.= =E2=80=9D - Mark Twain




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



--089e0149cb805259b004e223297f-- From sakimura@gmail.com Mon Jul 22 19:36:51 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73C2A11E81D3 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 19:36:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S2LX4sspdTQJ for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 19:36:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x22d.google.com (mail-la0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F00B11E81D2 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 19:36:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f45.google.com with SMTP id ev20so4076611lab.4 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 19:36:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=yfSv55YtrqOU8QTIaBEUO+ji2Zxz7KWBbORoAmZbvg0=; b=ZTgHwOkEFTjKu5NNzEhgD+vrugvwu0ntR6sjhupeX/+SC2Vmo47sPOEoLFiV7dE/R8 LYwili/NWkiBF9XdrFBKpUYYeIde6t2CqyClH+JTfZI6oFbf+qDfesGw3h+ZPcYDA9i4 CPdu5uK4vbhV3HRtkFPs84LBC0YZb2LUiA2Nk47JB9C8qfDE3TzFLlSKZzH4bZyXLRtO RxSKcC3hixzL6WD7ZFF80HWDKrnwgok7CqYFmt1DgjvkbY3yxVeRMySzlI9rqAyZoxNQ Xe62wyDHn9tzvX6KQ1fxJQ4v+AxJHQudq239tXu7mHV5bt9LBE2Zfe/rK/OfkvffztG6 8aVw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.29.227 with SMTP id n3mr13695377lah.43.1374547008484; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 19:36:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.199.33 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 19:36:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <9AA3BB39-01F1-4E73-99BC-C7ECD0D839C7@ve7jtb.com> References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> <0a1140f5-24d9-4be6-aab4-1ae6a3d63c0c@email.android.com> <032701ce86e5$27b2dff0$77189fd0$@packetizer.com> <9AA3BB39-01F1-4E73-99BC-C7ECD0D839C7@ve7jtb.com> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:36:48 +0900 Message-ID: From: Nat Sakimura To: John Bradley Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0158c76c2afc9e04e224aae4 Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , Melvin Carvalho , webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 02:36:51 -0000 --089e0158c76c2afc9e04e224aae4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +1 2013/7/22 John Bradley > Yes +1. > > On 2013-07-22, at 10:10 AM, "Paul E. Jones" wrote= : > > Melvin,**** > > It=92s easy enough to replace strings in URIs should data need to be > ported. I suggest we remove the word =93absolute=94 where we currently h= ave > =93absolute URI=94 and then introduce a new paragraph in the terminology > section as follows:**** > > The use of URIs throughout this document refers to URIs following the > syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986. Relative URIs, having syntax > following that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger.**= * > * > > Is that clear?**** > > Paul**** > > *From:* Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM > *To:* Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI**** > ** ** > ** ** > > ** ** > On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones wrote:**** > > In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate question > would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be absolute, but not > following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead just following "URI".= * > *** > Yes, that's a good question. Generally relative URIs are relative to the > document, but they need not be. For example they could be relative by > default to the [supposed] webfinger registry. In JSON LD they have a > @context variable which allows quite a bit of flexibility in this regard. > I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered a must in standards based > serialization (I suspect not) but they have the advantage of slightly > increased data portability.**** > **** > > Paul**** > > ** ** > ------------------------------ > *From:* Melvin Carvalho > *Sent:* Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013**** > > *To:* "Paul E. Jones" **** > *Cc:* webfinger **** > > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI**** > ** ** > ** ** > ** ** > ** ** > On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones wrote:**** > Folks, > > One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those > identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". This > term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have = a > concrete meaning, namely this: > > absolute-URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] > > And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD > specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to > the > above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs > (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). > > I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the > intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, > but to require the standard URI syntax: > > URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]**** > ** ** > There are many ways that people do this, see: > > http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces**** > **** > > > Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute" > that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have an > opinion on this?**** > > ** ** > +1 on allowing relative URIs**** > **** > > > Paul > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > > --=20 Nat Sakimura (=3Dnat) Chairman, OpenID Foundation http://nat.sakimura.org/ @_nat_en --089e0158c76c2afc9e04e224aae4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+1
 --089e0158c76c2afc9e04e224aae4-- From edmundjay@sbcglobal.net Mon Jul 22 11:21:45 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CA6421F8546 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:21:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ss9R-kMxa8o8 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:21:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm19-vm1.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (nm19-vm1.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com [216.109.115.96]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C16C211E811E for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:21:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [66.196.81.158] by nm19.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 22 Jul 2013 18:21:24 -0000 Received: from [66.196.81.143] by tm4.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 22 Jul 2013 18:21:24 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1019.access.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 22 Jul 2013 18:21:24 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 243265.38533.bm@omp1019.access.mail.bf1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 73248 invoked by uid 60001); 22 Jul 2013 18:14:44 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sbcglobal.net; s=s1024; t=1374516884; bh=28LO3YBXQP8RVyfO9lVbOJEWNyoFMm+wy6xCpO2Zz2c=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-RocketYMMF:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=TDjJx/zBFP++nRSTXM5lWbxzuSg+tw+uFbl1KZZ6CdXq87xJQlewIWTY6YZ8pu5e64JyKFIKGM5+b1vHiyQfcQh+RGSuFE6yFqFlqJzsXqvoDVWR1FM6lf/IXopDfUU2KaHK6ndJfyCIxlyXMteM50ETKPkLUiLwfLe9/7gJmOs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-RocketYMMF:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=4/HM2e/yUKuyjIzNu8pc3Pnk5yjzoRiFuimKYwaRd8PCFXqYY4jcvMlZGy37pmfZMCHQqKAlQQEblwfn3aSVbqwWnVpO+VsfGDW1N113er6HS6IKHDDl1StQQ4UNyPWkgfUaIn6zSVebJoe/UAOwHRkxj3Eu73/RDoDwSHhNiiE=; X-YMail-OSG: uTJp6pMVM1mHk2M_kV8b46DOr3KCFnYz7ip0zV3ZE_1G0pM pLZsCgzP6lsPQUnH0_C2yZ721ujJQVNtjSL6xgfurjOYqTgqddzp4_FVd_9J YixjSFNhWWM7DFMU.hpn8Hln3uiqT2DodZ47g3fldVA1mk4GQCjLDV4syNt8 QK6HQbjja5Hw2NTSy1ROCvv0RJZXSckubxlj3bmu7mdRVYSR9aV88WlRGPBR f0Y3JcIXYePETg8uu6FemhcHSJlDuBRfu7Ixr.PHKyz3IhMC7o1_9ebLN7KH RWScsYTThZaM9zFZR6oFVhI0xYqb63Wm460dFufQerayVvS.WCFxc1viMWAg YKNpHnNAHyXYc10Wfpe3iQ_UTW2WABNOZkeDq.M3cHXmEvSrS57CgiX1_s22 U1AfICl0G_3AbYyQwdCbt039lVioZ0phwcQplLLj00dh1f4W5ldYI5Wm8Bmb fk5VGpdLgA8G6I8CrR4WEO0u1uxpEwbxE5Tyt5vRvNhvwW.zlfqowBYvHc_t uR4mbm4VF3UyYK4BJJ.zGvHbG96dFa.I02vTO9sltVdMqPOGYMj4xu2x6wK1 1RD8dxDquSTjG6LhUfEgoUA0M1jTTa1XMFeDG9FuK00yjcN.13PFjloaZwnd fCzWI.rhhulwdsxiQpQdY6O5NTB9QuoDJS3ogZYikiQfaxo_lryhOQq9X6HC YaJBdVJ9w3wckKNCQc9umnbJuS1b7WCdEfT9J2_BX979vyqg4VkR.TVcqAd. PoCrYR87LPUJhixplyikwDZiwP85jwFnCBHPrO6WKsUc.BsDb8sfgkX7RyzP HvFazl8Fyyh_7OLd94btU3Aw3zZnDRWn6FA9cnGLieRrQ1rnRBaFyOHyuQiT D.vBQcWexMW_TABGNbueSf.L8hW0_CSXbnYqg3L4- Received: from [70.36.254.42] by web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:14:43 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, VGhlIGZvbGxvd2luZyBjYW4gYmUgdXNlZCA6wqAKwqAKYWxpY2VAY29ubmVjdC5vcGVuaWQ0LnVzIG9yCmJvYkBjb25uZWN0Lm9wZW5pZDQudXMKCi0tIEVkbXVuZAoKX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KIEZyb206IE1pa2UgSm9uZXMgPE1pY2hhZWwuSm9uZXNAbWljcm9zb2Z0LmNvbT4KVG86ICJvcGVuaWQtY29ubmVjdC1pbnRlcm9wQGdvb2dsZWdyb3Vwcy5jb20iIDxvcGVuaWQtY29ubmVjdC1pbnRlcm9wQGdvb2dsZWdyb3Vwcy5jb20.OyBUaW0gQnJheSA8dGJyYXlAdGV4dHVhbGkBMAEBAQE- X-RocketYMMF: edmundjay@sbcglobal.net X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.150.561 References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> Message-ID: <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:14:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Edmund Jay To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" , Tim Bray , "Paul E. Jones" In-Reply-To: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="1009959307-800925855-1374516883=:73070" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 23:55:57 -0700 Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Edmund Jay List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 18:21:45 -0000 --1009959307-800925855-1374516883=:73070 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The following can be used :=C2=A0=0A=C2=A0=0Aalice@connect.openid4.us or=0A= bob@connect.openid4.us=0A=0A-- Edmund=0A=0A________________________________= =0A From: Mike Jones =0ATo: "openid-connect-in= terop@googlegroups.com" ; Tim Bray= ; Paul E. Jones =0ACc: "webf= inger@ietf.org" =0ASent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51= PM=0ASubject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs=0A =0A=0A=0A =0ACould those= of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post specific identif= iers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail base= d discovery using WebFinger?=0A=C2=A0=0A=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Thanks all,=0A=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -- Mike=0A=C2=A0=0AFrom:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups= .com [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Jon= es=0ASent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM=0ATo: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones=0A= Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com=0ASubject: = RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs=0A=C2=A0=0ASee=0Ahttp://osis.idcommons.net= /wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most of which impleme= nt Discovery, including WebFinger.=0A=C2=A0=0A=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -- Mike=0A=C2=A0=0AFrom:webfinger-bounces@ietf.= org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray=0ASent: Frida= y, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM=0ATo: Paul E. Jones=0ACc: webfinger@ietf.org=0ASub= ject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs=0A=C2=A0=0AGot an OpenID Connect pro= vider? rel=3Dhttp://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer=0A=C2=A0=0AOn Sun, = Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote:=0ATim= ,=0A=C2=A0=0AYou=E2=80=99re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto:= / acct: / xmpp: =0A=C2=A0=0AMost of what is returned is just test data (th= ough some is valid), but it should be properly formatted.=0A=C2=A0=0AI have= aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.= =C2=A0 I=E2=80=99m happy to throw something in if you want to check a parti= cular response.=0A=C2=A0=0APaul=0A=C2=A0=0AFrom:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org = [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray=0ASent: Sunday, J= uly 14, 2013 5:54 PM=0ATo: webfinger@ietf.org=0ASubject: [webfinger] Lookin= g for JRDs=0A=C2=A0=0AWorking on some WF code... looking for some candidate= addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling.=C2=A0 Suggestions? -T=0A=C2=A0=0A= -- =0AYou received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Gr= oups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.=0ATo unsubscribe from this group and s= top receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsub= scribe@googlegroups.com.=0AFor more options, visit https://groups.google.co= m/groups/opt_out.=0A=C2=A0=0A=C2=A0=0A-- =0AYou received this message becau= se you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.= =0ATo unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send a= n email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.=0AFor more = options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. --1009959307-800925855-1374516883=:73070 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The following can b= e used : 
 
alice@connect= .openid4.us or
bob@connect.openid4.us

-- Edmund
From: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" &l= t;openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com>; Tim Bray <tbray@textualit= y.com>; Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@i= etf.org>
Sent: Sat= urday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM
Subject: RE:= [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

=0A
=0A=0A =0A =0A
Edmund,
 
Note that we removed the =E2=80=9Cexpires=E2=80=9D header from the= current WebFinger spec.  It=E2=80=99s OK to have it there, but it sho= uld be ignored by recipients.
 
Paul
 
From: Edmund Jay [m= ailto:ejay@mgi1.com]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 2:15 PM
T= o: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
= Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking fo= r JRDs
 = ;
The following can be used : 
 
 
-- Edmund
= From: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
To: "= openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" <openid-connect-i= nterop@googlegroups.com>; Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>; Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: "<= a rel=3D"nofollow" ymailto=3D"mailto:webfinger@ietf.org" target=3D"_blank" = href=3D"mailto:webfinger@ietf.org">webfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org>
Sent: Saturda= y, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JR= Ds
 
Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please po= st specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for = testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger?
&nbs= p;
     &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;    Thanks all,
   = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;       -- Mike
 
From:<= span style=3D"font-size:10.0pt;color:black;"> openid-connect-interop@= googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com= ] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:= 34 PM
To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@= ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com
Subject:= RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs
 
= See http://osis.idcommons.n= et/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most of which imple= ment Discovery, including WebFinger.
 
&n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;         -- Mike
 
=
From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Be= half Of Tim Bray
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM
To= : Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfi= nger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs
&= nbsp;
Got an OpenID Connect= provider? rel=3Dhttp= ://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer
 
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. = Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:
=  
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to th= e Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this= group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For = more options, visit https://groups.google.co= m/groups/opt_out.
 
 
--
You received this message because you are subscrib= ed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe f= rom this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups= /opt_out.
 
 
 

---1412092350-1694681845-1374518385=:60932-- From roland.hedberg@adm.umu.se Mon Jul 22 12:29:35 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1337521F94DC for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 12:29:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B9OGD8zIB1GQ for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 12:29:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.ad.umu.se (umdac-ch1.ad.umu.se [130.239.1.246]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0944611E8125 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 12:29:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from UMDAC-CCR1.ad.umu.se ([169.254.1.56]) by UMDAC-CH1.ad.umu.se ([130.239.1.246]) with mapi; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 21:28:57 +0200 From: Roland Hedberg To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 21:29:09 +0200 Thread-Topic: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Thread-Index: Ac6HEbWRSs1Jw84/So6LE6GinB75KA== Message-ID: <770A1CF6-4290-48E0-AFCC-ED9ED60357DB@adm.umu.se> References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> In-Reply-To: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> Accept-Language: en-US, sv-SE Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, sv-SE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 23:55:57 -0700 Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , Tim Bray , "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 19:29:35 -0000 21 jul 2013 kl. 07:51 skrev Mike Jones : > Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post spe= cific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for testin= g e-mail based discovery using WebFinger? diana@xenosmilus2.umdc.umu.se -- Roland "Education is the path from cocky ignorance to miserable uncertainty.=94 - = Mark Twain From duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp Tue Jul 23 01:59:31 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D51A511E8155 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 01:59:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.79 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.79 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pDFaGFylNO9m for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 01:59:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp [133.2.253.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B2B811E8103 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 01:59:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.253.231]) by scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id r6N8x9Wc014808; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:59:10 +0900 Received: from (unknown [133.2.206.134]) by scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp with smtp id 0d8f_64d9_22fe0130_f376_11e2_a64a_001e6722eec2; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:59:08 +0900 Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [133.2.210.1]) by itmail2.it.aoyama.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0629ABFF80; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:57:13 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <51EE45C5.4080701@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:58:45 +0900 From: =?UTF-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiBKLiBEw7xyc3Qi?= Organization: Aoyama Gakuin University User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100722 Eudora/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Paul E. Jones" References: <028301ce869f$596c12a0$0c4437e0$@packetizer.com> <042f01ce8722$4d98a410$e8c9ec30$@packetizer.com> In-Reply-To: <042f01ce8722$4d98a410$e8c9ec30$@packetizer.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: webfinger@ietf.org, 'Barry Leiba' Subject: Re: [webfinger] Webfinger and URI vs IRI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 08:59:32 -0000 Hello everybody, On 2013/07/23 6:27, Paul E. Jones wrote: > Barry, > The reason I raise this is that RFC 5988 refers to the target IRI (the > =E2=80=9Chref=E2=80=9D in WebFinger link relation) and context IRI (the= =E2=80=9Csubject=E2=80=9D and > =E2=80=9Caliases=E2=80=9D in WebFinger). Only ASCII is used in some pr= otocols, so the > IRIs must be formatted as URIs. > However, JRD is JSON and, therefore, Unicode. Thus, we could easily > accommodate links like this: > { > > "rel" : "test2", > > "href" : "http://example.org/=E7=A7=81=E3=81=AE =E6=96=87=E6=9B=B8= .txt" > > } > As opposed this form: > { > > "rel" : "test2", > > "href" : > "http://example.org/%E7%A7%81%E3%81%AE%20%E6%96%87%E6%9B%B8.txt" > > } > I have no strong preference, but the text did have IRI mentioned in one > place in the JRD spec section, but it was not consistent through the > document. Everywhere else, we specified URI. > So, if IRIs are truly only for presentation, That's clearly not the case. IRIs are used in HTML and other places. > then the latter example above > should be what WF servers return. The query target is always a > percent-encoded URI, so it=E2=80=99s a non-issue. For most of you, the differences between the above two examples are=20 mostly irrelevant, and the second one may even look more familiar. But=20 for those who can read the first one (Japanese, although the space is=20 highly suspicious, because Japanese doesn't use spaces), the first one=20 is very clear, whereas the second one is complete gibberish. As a slightly related example, one could write "rel" : "test2" as "rel" : "%74%65%73%74%32" and it would provide about the same level of useless obscuration. Please stop this "only for presentation" myth that essentially means=20 that everything is legible as long as it's English. Regards, Martin. From barryleiba@gmail.com Tue Jul 23 02:26:53 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D79511E80DC for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 02:26:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.827 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.827 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 41heDo8blp0d for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 02:26:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qc0-x22a.google.com (mail-qc0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 160FD11E8156 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 02:26:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qc0-f170.google.com with SMTP id s1so4194291qcw.29 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 02:26:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=+ua4LW/Q9qoTpX/usDrC2F+qEzA2nlGMAPuIbno2lts=; b=MCDy57t+tONz0bw3vTz2uLyBL5pH8pVYsO9RyDGMm7yq0JKC630ooeSses8IMjofwk zcV1AcAzYrt2Y/U5wRCcxZq6TqyDR1w+JBiRw1MopNVKnDgO95N9p4j6r4jVqtgh9Id6 WqLEZKyy+0wK/1WElTDW0RK6sk9mCmwv5VHS2wwJwHdOaGxeBEaZfu1aWZsU42Oyt4a8 hZsqqL1liJdUcqciImSByTPrGP7yf8BzClVbEob2PY/2L4pYifGn+C65n9XGoTGsAX2A l/IHk4fiUBxuJDXLMu1s82vk4Lgc7TuutlNJSN0atJUgiJXHME+ZVvQXbqGyOdZwPW2U 0hRg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.63.7 with SMTP id z7mr38959326qah.51.1374571610474; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 02:26:50 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.224.59.211 with HTTP; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 02:26:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51EE45C5.4080701@it.aoyama.ac.jp> References: <028301ce869f$596c12a0$0c4437e0$@packetizer.com> <042f01ce8722$4d98a410$e8c9ec30$@packetizer.com> <51EE45C5.4080701@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 05:26:50 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: mQf9g1qb0RGs4rqi3iolJOU3x7Q Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Martin_J=2E_D=FCrst?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bdc77aa8f8f7204e22a64b5 Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Webfinger and URI vs IRI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:26:53 -0000 --047d7bdc77aa8f8f7204e22a64b5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Please stop this "only for presentation" myth that essentially means that everything is legible as long as it's English. It's not a "myth", Martin. It's a question of who needs to read it. Humans don't have to read what's in the JSON. The application that shows a URI to a user will have to render it in a way the user can read it. That's where we get the presentation layer. Barry On Tuesday, July 23, 2013, "Martin J. D=C3=BCrst" wrote: > Hello everybody, > > On 2013/07/23 6:27, Paul E. Jones wrote: > >> Barry, >> > > The reason I raise this is that RFC 5988 refers to the target IRI (the >> =E2=80=9Chref=E2=80=9D in WebFinger link relation) and context IRI (the = =E2=80=9Csubject=E2=80=9D and >> =E2=80=9Caliases=E2=80=9D in WebFinger). Only ASCII is used in some pro= tocols, so the >> IRIs must be formatted as URIs. >> > > However, JRD is JSON and, therefore, Unicode. Thus, we could easily >> accommodate links like this: >> > > { >> >> "rel" : "test2", >> >> "href" : "http://example.org/=E7=A7=81=E3=81=AE =E6=96=87=E6=9B=B8.= txt" >> >> } >> > > As opposed this form: >> > > { >> >> "rel" : "test2", >> >> "href" : >> "http://example.org/%E7%A7%81%**E3%81%AE%20%E6%96%87%E6%9B%B8.**txt >> " >> >> } >> > > I have no strong preference, but the text did have IRI mentioned in one >> place in the JRD spec section, but it was not consistent through the >> document. Everywhere else, we specified URI. >> > > So, if IRIs are truly only for presentation, >> > > That's clearly not the case. IRIs are used in HTML and other places. > > then the latter example above >> should be what WF servers return. The query target is always a >> percent-encoded URI, so it=E2=80=99s a non-issue. >> > > For most of you, the differences between the above two examples are mostl= y > irrelevant, and the second one may even look more familiar. But for those > who can read the first one (Japanese, although the space is highly > suspicious, because Japanese doesn't use spaces), the first one is very > clear, whereas the second one is complete gibberish. > > As a slightly related example, one could write > "rel" : "test2" > as > "rel" : "%74%65%73%74%32" > and it would provide about the same level of useless obscuration. > > Please stop this "only for presentation" myth that essentially means that > everything is legible as long as it's English. > > Regards, Martin. > --047d7bdc77aa8f8f7204e22a64b5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>=C2=A0Please stop this "only for presentation" myth t= hat essentially means that everything is legible as long as it's Englis= h.

It's not a "myth", Martin. =C2=A0It'= s a question of who needs to read it. =C2=A0Humans don't have to read w= hat's in the JSON. =C2=A0The application that shows a URI to a user wil= l have to render it in a way the user can read it. =C2=A0That's where w= e get the presentation layer.

Barry

On Tuesday, July 23, 2013, "M= artin J. D=C3=BCrst" wrote:
Hello e= verybody,

On 2013/07/23 6:27, Paul E. Jones wrote:
Barry,

The reason I raise this is that RFC 5988 refers to the target IRI (the
=E2=80=9Chref=E2=80=9D in WebFinger link relation) and context IRI (the =E2= =80=9Csubject=E2=80=9D and
=E2=80=9Caliases=E2=80=9D in WebFinger). =C2=A0Only ASCII is used in some p= rotocols, so the
IRIs must be formatted as URIs.

However, JRD is JSON and, therefore, Unicode. =C2=A0Thus, we could easily accommodate links like this:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0{

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0"rel" : "test2",

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0"href" : "http://example.org/=E7=A7=81=E3=81=AE= =E6=96=87=E6=9B=B8.txt"

}

As opposed this form:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0{

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0"rel" : "test2",

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0"href" :
"http://example.org/%E7%A7%81%E3%81%AE%20%E6%= 96%87%E6%9B%B8.txt"

}

I have no strong preference, but the text did have IRI mentioned in one
place in the JRD spec section, but it was not consistent through the
document. =C2=A0Everywhere else, we specified URI.

So, if IRIs are truly only for presentation,

That's clearly not the case. IRIs are used in HTML and other places.
then the latter example above
should be what WF servers return. =C2=A0The query target is always a
percent-encoded URI, so it=E2=80=99s a non-issue.

For most of you, the differences between the above two examples are mostly = irrelevant, and the second one may even look more familiar. But for those w= ho can read the first one (Japanese, although the space is highly suspiciou= s, because Japanese doesn't use spaces), the first one is very clear, w= hereas the second one is complete gibberish.

As a slightly related example, one could write
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0"rel" : "test2"
as
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0"rel" : "%74%65%73%74%32"
and it would provide about the same level of useless obscuration.

Please stop this "only for presentation" myth that essentially me= ans that everything is legible as long as it's English.

Regards, =C2=A0 Martin.
--047d7bdc77aa8f8f7204e22a64b5-- From javier@gluu.org Tue Jul 23 12:51:17 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD48911E80E7 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 12:51:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.264 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.264 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RxbkTemdR-pB for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 12:51:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gateway14.websitewelcome.com (gateway14.websitewelcome.com [67.18.68.2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2052111E82F4 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 12:50:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gateway14.websitewelcome.com (Postfix, from userid 5007) id 01346B0DEE2E1; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:50:48 -0500 (CDT) Received: from gator405.hostgator.com (gator405.hostgator.com [184.172.165.9]) by gateway14.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0E2CB0DEE266 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:50:47 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [201.222.71.66] (port=47744 helo=localhost.localdomain) by gator405.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1ibl-0006Zq-LO; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:50:54 -0500 Message-ID: <51EEDE9C.8020105@gluu.org> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 15:50:52 -0400 From: Javier Rojas Blum User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Edmund Jay References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060203050301050804060805" X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator405.hostgator.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - gluu.org X-BWhitelist: no X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: (localhost.localdomain) [201.222.71.66]:47744 X-Source-Auth: javier+gluu.org X-Email-Count: 7 X-Source-Cap: ZGlnaW1vbjtkaWdpbW9uO2dhdG9yNDA1Lmhvc3RnYXRvci5jb20= Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" , "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" , Tim Bray , "Paul E. Jones" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 19:51:17 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------060203050301050804060805 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit acct:javier@seed.gluu.org acct:mike@seed.gluu.org -- Javier On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay wrote: > The following can be used : > alice@connect.openid4.us or > bob@connect.openid4.us > > -- Edmund > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Mike Jones > *To:* "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" > ; Tim Bray > ; Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* "webfinger@ietf.org" > *Sent:* Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM > *Subject:* RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > > Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post > specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use > for testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger? > Thanks all, > -- Mike > *From:*openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com > [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Mike Jones > *Sent:* Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM > *To:* Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com > *Subject:* RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of > OpenID providers, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger. > -- Mike > *From:*webfinger-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM > *To:* Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > Got an OpenID Connect provider? > rel=http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer > On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones > wrote: > Tim, > You're welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: > Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but > it should be properly formatted. > I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the > acct: reply. I'm happy to throw something in if you want to check a > particular response. > Paul > *From:*webfinger-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org > ] *On Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM > *To:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate > addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger --------------060203050301050804060805 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
acct:javier@seed.gluu.org
acct:mike@seed.gluu.org

-- Javier


On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay wrote:
The following can be used : 
 
bob@connect.openid4.us

-- Edmund
From: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" <openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com>; Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>; Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger?
 
                                                            Thanks all,
                                                            -- Mike
 
From: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM
To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs
 
See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger.
 
                                                            -- Mike
 
From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs
 
Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer
 
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:
Tim,
 
You’re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp:
 
Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly formatted.
 
I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.  I’m happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular response.
 
Paul
 
From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs
 
Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling.  Suggestions? -T
 
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 




_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

--------------060203050301050804060805-- From paulej@packetizer.com Tue Jul 23 12:54:08 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A345B11E82E1 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 12:54:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.19 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.19 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.408, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ssUUQ+lMDQSI for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 12:54:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9533911E82D6 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 12:54:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6NJrx8X003784 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 23 Jul 2013 15:53:59 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1374609239; bh=JhGhy61GuJzR6JVivQQIQA6DHIxDV4bf/6lCPukXUI0=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=emCua2IkqlM+ja1R86AbdXWd5U1wlb7yrCfR2fZyAlCQz8CBGLpVnwQL/F3ECMyd9 JaVSEHn47KZtSImBbHHZUFVcnOBjNstv9ph7QCrMC7qiiBWOmgHzHVuqzCBdKwmaLX VXTHK2xCPDo9azd6+59O/OZuHoUZIhwIW01WeKZ8= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Javier Rojas Blum'" , "'Edmund Jay'" References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51EEDE9C.8020105@gluu.org> In-Reply-To: <51EEDE9C.8020105@gluu.org> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 15:54:04 -0400 Message-ID: <05cb01ce87de$62c09200$2841b600$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_05CC_01CE87BC.DBB0EDD0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQL/r+No/hn+Dxq4/2ORfMNzEE5vjgGfjNBBAk5SfHcBYrYgdgKGwE2GAVKR0D8CoDoGBZayC8Gw Content-Language: en-us Cc: webfinger@ietf.org, 'Tim Bray' , openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 19:54:08 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_05CC_01CE87BC.DBB0EDD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be empty. From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:51 PM To: Edmund Jay Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs acct:javier@seed.gluu.org acct:mike@seed.gluu.org -- Javier On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay wrote: The following can be used : alice@connect.openid4.us or bob@connect.openid4.us -- Edmund _____ From: Mike Jones To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" ; Tim Bray ; Paul E. Jones Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger? Thanks all, -- Mike From: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Jones Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger. -- Mike From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: Tim, You're welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly formatted. I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply. I'm happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular response. Paul From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM To: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger ------=_NextPart_000_05CC_01CE87BC.DBB0EDD0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be = empty.

 

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] = On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, = 2013 3:51 PM
To: Edmund Jay
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; = openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. = Jones
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for = JRDs

 

acct:javier@seed.gluu.orgacct:mike@seed.gluu.org
-- Javier


On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay = wrote:

The = following can be used : 

 <= /o:p>

 <= /o:p>

-- = Edmund

From:<= /b> = Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.c= om>
To: "openid-conn= ect-interop@googlegroups.com" <openid-connec= t-interop@googlegroups.com>; Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>; = Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> =
Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org> =
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM
Subject: RE: = [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Could those of you with OpenID = OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e-mail = address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery = using WebFinger?

 

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       Thanks = all,

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       -- = Mike

 

From: openid-connect-in= terop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-con= nect-interop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike = Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM
To: Tim = Bray; Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-in= terop@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking = for JRDs

 

See http://osis.idcom= mons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most = of which implement Discovery, including = WebFinger.

 

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       -- = Mike

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM
To: = Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: = [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Got an OpenID Connect = provider? rel=3Dhttp://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer

 

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at = 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> = wrote:

Tim,

=

 

You’re welcome to test my = addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: =

 

Most of what is returned is = just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly = formatted.

 

I have aliases, properties, = titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.  I’m = happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular = response.

 

Paul

=

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: = webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: [webfinger] = Looking for JRDs

 

Working on some WF code... = looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD = wrangling.  Suggestions? = -T

 

--
You received this = message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID = Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop = receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com= .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 =
 

--
You received this message because you = are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" = group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from = it, send an email to openi= d-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, = visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 =
 

 




_______________________=
________________________
webfinger mailing =
list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf=
.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 

------=_NextPart_000_05CC_01CE87BC.DBB0EDD0-- From javier@gluu.org Tue Jul 23 13:07:53 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7196311E82D6 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:07:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.264 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.264 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wd87IsNXMeTc for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:07:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gateway14.websitewelcome.com (gateway14.websitewelcome.com [69.93.179.25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3D2B11E8116 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:07:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gateway14.websitewelcome.com (Postfix, from userid 5007) id D7EBBB0EA3F68; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 15:07:40 -0500 (CDT) Received: from gator405.hostgator.com (gator405.hostgator.com [184.172.165.9]) by gateway14.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5E0CB0EA3F44 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 15:07:40 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [201.222.71.66] (port=47959 helo=localhost.localdomain) by gator405.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1is6-0004nC-7v; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 15:07:47 -0500 Message-ID: <51EEE28E.7080604@gluu.org> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:07:42 -0400 From: Javier Rojas Blum User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Paul E. Jones" References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51EEDE9C.8020105@gluu.org> <05cb01ce87de$62c09200$2841b600$@packetizer.com> In-Reply-To: <05cb01ce87de$62c09200$2841b600$@packetizer.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020300030903090706040703" X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator405.hostgator.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - gluu.org X-BWhitelist: no X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: (localhost.localdomain) [201.222.71.66]:47959 X-Source-Auth: javier+gluu.org X-Email-Count: 4 X-Source-Cap: ZGlnaW1vbjtkaWdpbW9uO2dhdG9yNDA1Lmhvc3RnYXRvci5jb20= Cc: webfinger@ietf.org, 'Tim Bray' , openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com, 'Edmund Jay' Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 20:07:53 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------020300030903090706040703 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Please try this: https://seed.gluu.org/.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:javier@seed.gluu.org&rel=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fconnect%2F1.0%2Fissuer Regards -- Javier On 07/23/2013 03:54 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: > > I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be empty. > > *From:*webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] > *On Behalf Of *Javier Rojas Blum > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:51 PM > *To:* Edmund Jay > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim > Bray; Paul E. Jones > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > > acct:javier@seed.gluu.org > acct:mike@seed.gluu.org > > -- Javier > > > On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay wrote: > > The following can be used : > > alice@connect.openid4.us or > > bob@connect.openid4.us > > -- Edmund > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:*Mike Jones > > *To:* "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" > > > ; Tim Bray > ; Paul E. > Jones > *Cc:* "webfinger@ietf.org" > > *Sent:* Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM > *Subject:* RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > > Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please > post specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim > could use for testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger? > > Thanks all, > > -- Mike > > *From:*openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com > > [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of > *Mike Jones > *Sent:* Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM > *To:* Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org ; > openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com > > *Subject:* RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > > See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of > OpenID providers, most of which implement Discovery, including > WebFinger. > > -- Mike > > *From:*webfinger-bounces@ietf.org > > [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM > *To:* Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > > Got an OpenID Connect provider? > rel=http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer > > On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones > > wrote: > > Tim, > > You're welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / > xmpp: > > Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), > but it should be properly formatted. > > I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in > the acct: reply. I'm happy to throw something in if you want to > check a particular response. > > Paul > > *From:*webfinger-bounces@ietf.org > > [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org > ] *On Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM > *To:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > > Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate > addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, > send an email to > openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, > send an email to > openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > webfinger mailing list > > webfinger@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger --------------020300030903090706040703 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Please try this: https://seed.gluu.org/.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:javier@seed.gluu.org&rel=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fconnect%2F1.0%2Fissuer

Regards

-- Javier


On 07/23/2013 03:54 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote:

I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be empty.

 

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:51 PM
To: Edmund Jay
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

acct:javier@seed.gluu.org
acct:mike@seed.gluu.org

-- Javier


On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay wrote:

The following can be used : 

 

 

-- Edmund

From: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" <openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com>; Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>; Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger?

 

                                                            Thanks all,

                                                            -- Mike

 

From: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM
To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger.

 

                                                            -- Mike

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer

 

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Tim,

 

You’re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp:

 

Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly formatted.

 

I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.  I’m happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular response.

 

Paul

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling.  Suggestions? -T

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

 




_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 



_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

--------------020300030903090706040703-- From paulej@packetizer.com Tue Jul 23 13:25:09 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E51D11E83A0 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:25:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.225 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.225 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.239, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTP_ESCAPED_HOST=0.134] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h3cIPTICfGGd for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:25:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CDD311E8136 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:25:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6NKOmUV005736 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:24:49 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1374611089; bh=wUR6nq2JfK2ZpYfW4cF1kNa/bOMmPtwRceDrTY76yt4=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=bG29u8fcwmDegaDsGLK9j32rYeX9NAcJv1xln3w6Uz29V/Q/2fxygD/rE+lxgSXfw /Msr3F11MadwRe3h8ZZR3cyNaDZj+kTcq4w1bWuQlwzXxtvWUQyi0rtM0gVzHN1ec+ uVOTqyGzjt9ZUdtdkz5UrZKi2N/V82sPnmoL18RA= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Javier Rojas Blum'" References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51EEDE9C.8020105@gluu.org> <05cb01ce87de$62c09200$2841b600$@packetizer.com> <51EEE28E.7080604@gluu.org> In-Reply-To: <51EEE28E.7080604@gluu.org> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:24:54 -0400 Message-ID: <05f901ce87e2$b14dd5f0$13e981d0$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_05FA_01CE87C1.2A3E7FE0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQL/r+No/hn+Dxq4/2ORfMNzEE5vjgGfjNBBAk5SfHcBYrYgdgKGwE2GAVKR0D8CoDoGBQEixDXtAtnNNruWki/kIA== Content-Language: en-us Cc: webfinger@ietf.org, 'Edmund Jay' , 'Tim Bray' , openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 20:25:09 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_05FA_01CE87C1.2A3E7FE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit That works, but why does it fail if the rel parameters is absent? That should not fail. Paul From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 4:08 PM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; 'Tim Bray'; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; 'Edmund Jay' Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Please try this: https://seed.gluu.org/.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:javier@seed.gluu.o rg &rel=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fconnect%2F1.0%2Fissuer Regards -- Javier On 07/23/2013 03:54 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be empty. From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:51 PM To: Edmund Jay Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs acct:javier@seed.gluu.org acct:mike@seed.gluu.org -- Javier On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay wrote: The following can be used : alice@connect.openid4.us or bob@connect.openid4.us -- Edmund _____ From: Mike Jones To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" ; Tim Bray ; Paul E. Jones Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger? Thanks all, -- Mike From: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Jones Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger. -- Mike From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: Tim, You're welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly formatted. I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply. I'm happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular response. Paul From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM To: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger ------=_NextPart_000_05FA_01CE87C1.2A3E7FE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

That works, but why does it fail if the rel parameters is = absent?  That should not fail.

 

Paul

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] = On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, = 2013 4:08 PM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: = webfinger@ietf.org; 'Tim Bray'; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; = 'Edmund Jay'
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for = JRDs

 

I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be = empty.

 

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org= [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.= org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum
Sent: Tuesday, = July 23, 2013 3:51 PM
To: Edmund Jay
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-in= terop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
Subject: = Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

acct:javier@seed.gluu.orgacct:mike@seed.gluu.org
-- Javier


On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay = wrote:

The = following can be used : 

 

 

-- = Edmund

From:<= /b> = Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.c= om>
To: "openid-conn= ect-interop@googlegroups.com" <openid-connec= t-interop@googlegroups.com>; Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>; = Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> =
Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org> =
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM
Subject: RE: = [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Could those of you with OpenID = OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e-mail = address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery = using WebFinger?

 

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       Thanks = all,

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       -- = Mike

 

From: openid-connect-in= terop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-con= nect-interop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike = Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM
To: Tim = Bray; Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-in= terop@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking = for JRDs

 

See http://osis.idcom= mons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most = of which implement Discovery, including = WebFinger.

 

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       -- = Mike

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM
To: = Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: = [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Got an OpenID Connect = provider? rel=3Dhttp://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer

 

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at = 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> = wrote:

Tim,

=

 

You’re welcome to test my = addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: =

 

Most of what is returned is = just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly = formatted.

 

I have aliases, properties, = titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.  I’m = happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular = response.

 

Paul

=

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: = webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: [webfinger] = Looking for JRDs

 

Working on some WF code... = looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD = wrangling.  Suggestions? = -T

 

--
You received this = message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID = Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop = receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com= .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 =
 

--
You received this message because you = are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" = group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from = it, send an email to openi= d-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, = visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 =
 

 





___________________=
____________________________
webfinger mailing =
list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf=
.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 




_______________________=
________________________
webfinger mailing =
list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf=
.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 

------=_NextPart_000_05FA_01CE87C1.2A3E7FE0-- From javier@gluu.org Tue Jul 23 14:52:10 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFBCA11E8149 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:52:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.264 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.264 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 15pmtStU9XhY for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:51:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gateway07.websitewelcome.com (gateway07.websitewelcome.com [69.41.247.30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C488211E836F for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:51:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gateway07.websitewelcome.com (Postfix, from userid 5007) id 71B66E7F74738; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:50:48 -0500 (CDT) Received: from gator405.hostgator.com (gator405.hostgator.com [184.172.165.9]) by gateway07.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61B6DE7F746F8 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:50:48 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [201.222.71.66] (port=49825 helo=localhost.localdomain) by gator405.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V1kTv-0000rU-HA; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:50:56 -0500 Message-ID: <51EEFABD.8080000@gluu.org> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:50:53 -0400 From: Javier Rojas Blum User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Paul E. Jones" References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51EEDE9C.8020105@gluu.org> <05cb01ce87de$62c09200$2841b600$@packetizer.com> <51EEE28E.7080604@gluu.org> <05f901ce87e2$b14dd5f0$13e981d0$@packetizer.com> In-Reply-To: <05f901ce87e2$b14dd5f0$13e981d0$@packetizer.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090908030808050800060200" X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator405.hostgator.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - gluu.org X-BWhitelist: no X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: (localhost.localdomain) [201.222.71.66]:49825 X-Source-Auth: javier+gluu.org X-Email-Count: 13 X-Source-Cap: ZGlnaW1vbjtkaWdpbW9uO2dhdG9yNDA1Lmhvc3RnYXRvci5jb20= Cc: webfinger@ietf.org, 'Tim Bray' , openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com, 'Edmund Jay' Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 21:52:10 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------090908030808050800060200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Fixed now. Thanks -- Javier On 07/23/2013 04:24 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: > > That works, but why does it fail if the rel parameters is absent? > That should not fail. > > Paul > > *From:*webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] > *On Behalf Of *Javier Rojas Blum > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 23, 2013 4:08 PM > *To:* Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org; 'Tim Bray'; > openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; 'Edmund Jay' > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > > Please try this: > https://seed.gluu.org/.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:javier@seed.gluu.org&rel=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fconnect%2F1.0%2Fissuer > > Regards > > -- Javier > > > On 07/23/2013 03:54 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: > > I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be empty. > > *From:*webfinger-bounces@ietf.org > > [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Javier Rojas Blum > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:51 PM > *To:* Edmund Jay > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org ; > openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com > ; Tim Bray; Paul > E. Jones > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > > acct:javier@seed.gluu.org > acct:mike@seed.gluu.org > > -- Javier > > > On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay wrote: > > The following can be used : > > alice@connect.openid4.us or > > bob@connect.openid4.us > > -- Edmund > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:*Mike Jones > > *To:* "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" > > > ; Tim Bray > ; Paul E. > Jones > *Cc:* "webfinger@ietf.org" > > *Sent:* Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM > *Subject:* RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > > Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery > please post specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax > that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery using > WebFinger? > > Thanks all, > > -- Mike > > *From:*openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com > > [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of > *Mike Jones > *Sent:* Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM > *To:* Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org ; > openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com > > *Subject:* RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > > See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list > of OpenID providers, most of which implement Discovery, > including WebFinger. > > -- Mike > > *From:*webfinger-bounces@ietf.org > > [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM > *To:* Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > > Got an OpenID Connect provider? > rel=http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer > > On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones > > wrote: > > Tim, > > You're welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: > / xmpp: > > Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is > valid), but it should be properly formatted. > > I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters > in the acct: reply. I'm happy to throw something in if you > want to check a particular response. > > Paul > > *From:*webfinger-bounces@ietf.org > > [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org > ] *On Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM > *To:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* [webfinger] Looking for JRDs > > Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate > addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the > Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from > it, send an email to > openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the > Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from > it, send an email to > openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > webfinger mailing list > > webfinger@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > webfinger mailing list > > webfinger@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger --------------090908030808050800060200 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Fixed now.

Thanks

-- Javier

On 07/23/2013 04:24 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote:

That works, but why does it fail if the rel parameters is absent?  That should not fail.

 

Paul

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 4:08 PM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; 'Tim Bray'; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; 'Edmund Jay'
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be empty.

 

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:51 PM
To: Edmund Jay
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

acct:javier@seed.gluu.org
acct:mike@seed.gluu.org

-- Javier


On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay wrote:

The following can be used : 

 

 

-- Edmund

From: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" <openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com>; Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>; Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger?

 

                                                            Thanks all,

                                                            -- Mike

 

From: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM
To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger.

 

                                                            -- Mike

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer

 

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Tim,

 

You’re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp:

 

Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly formatted.

 

I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.  I’m happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular response.

 

Paul

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling.  Suggestions? -T

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

 





_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 




_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 



_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

--------------090908030808050800060200-- From paulej@packetizer.com Tue Jul 23 16:31:01 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF49211E8171 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:31:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.273 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.273 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.191, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTP_ESCAPED_HOST=0.134] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VZpsiW-1LgBq for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:30:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3F7411E8163 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:30:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6NNUoMU017100 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 23 Jul 2013 19:30:52 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1374622253; bh=0tWsah5dcOsjAeoMGbg0USnnZYpADqNLUSt8715M46o=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Yp3veJ7kh5HdZ27s55A6N+4HARxJlMLcsFkggsEdMU0YAV+3JOwsn3tQ7wA5RtSNH ChacmEztbyxmR1RT8FXO7cSSksBW4y3ZpfMOgMcVHlR+Mb6BBL9+DWMm+bg1VY2dyY RD6k+BYhcBpOzpp+ah+/UZkewH8F6xXPuuHmgoDM= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Javier Rojas Blum'" References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51EEDE9C.8020105@gluu.org> <05cb01ce87de$62c09200$2841b600$@packetizer.com> <51EEE28E.7080604@gluu.org> <05f901ce87e2$b14dd5f0$13e981d0$@packetizer.com> <51EEFABD.8080000@gluu.org> In-Reply-To: <51EEFABD.8080000@gluu.org> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 19:30:56 -0400 Message-ID: <067001ce87fc$af5e1510$0e1a3f30$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0671_01CE87DB.284EE610" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQL/r+No/hn+Dxq4/2ORfMNzEE5vjgGfjNBBAk5SfHcBYrYgdgKGwE2GAVKR0D8CoDoGBQEixDXtAtnNNrsBvxcbmwL3GOiPlmyyedA= Content-Language: en-us Cc: webfinger@ietf.org, 'Edmund Jay' , 'Tim Bray' , openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 23:31:02 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0671_01CE87DB.284EE610 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Verified! From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 5:51 PM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; 'Tim Bray'; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; 'Edmund Jay' Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Fixed now. Thanks -- Javier On 07/23/2013 04:24 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: That works, but why does it fail if the rel parameters is absent? That should not fail. Paul From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 4:08 PM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; 'Tim Bray'; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; 'Edmund Jay' Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Please try this: https://seed.gluu.org/.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:javier@seed.gluu.o rg &rel=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fconnect%2F1.0%2Fissuer Regards -- Javier On 07/23/2013 03:54 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be empty. From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:51 PM To: Edmund Jay Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs acct:javier@seed.gluu.org acct:mike@seed.gluu.org -- Javier On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay wrote: The following can be used : alice@connect.openid4.us or bob@connect.openid4.us -- Edmund _____ From: Mike Jones To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" ; Tim Bray ; Paul E. Jones Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger? Thanks all, -- Mike From: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Jones Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger. -- Mike From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: Tim, You're welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly formatted. I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply. I'm happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular response. Paul From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM To: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger ------=_NextPart_000_0671_01CE87DB.284EE610 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Verified!

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] = On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, = 2013 5:51 PM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: = webfinger@ietf.org; 'Tim Bray'; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; = 'Edmund Jay'
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for = JRDs

 

Fixed = now.

Thanks

-- Javier

On 07/23/2013 04:24 PM, Paul = E. Jones wrote:

That works, but why does it fail if the rel parameters is = absent?  That should not fail.

 

Paul

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org= [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.= org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum
Sent: Tuesday, = July 23, 2013 4:08 PM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; 'Tim Bray'; = openid-connect-in= terop@googlegroups.com; 'Edmund Jay'
Subject: Re: = [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be = empty.

 

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org= [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.= org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum
Sent: Tuesday, = July 23, 2013 3:51 PM
To: Edmund Jay
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-in= terop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
Subject: = Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

acct:javier@seed.gluu.orgacct:mike@seed.gluu.org
-- Javier


On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay = wrote:

The = following can be used : 

 

 

-- = Edmund

From:<= /b> = Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.c= om>
To: "openid-conn= ect-interop@googlegroups.com" <openid-connec= t-interop@googlegroups.com>; Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>; = Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> =
Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org> =
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM
Subject: RE: = [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Could those of you with OpenID = OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e-mail = address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery = using WebFinger?

 

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       Thanks = all,

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       -- = Mike

 

From: openid-connect-in= terop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-con= nect-interop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike = Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM
To: Tim = Bray; Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-in= terop@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking = for JRDs

 

See http://osis.idcom= mons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most = of which implement Discovery, including = WebFinger.

 

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       -- = Mike

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM
To: = Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: = [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Got an OpenID Connect = provider? rel=3Dhttp://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer

 

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at = 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> = wrote:

Tim,

=

 

You’re welcome to test my = addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: =

 

Most of what is returned is = just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly = formatted.

 

I have aliases, properties, = titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.  I’m = happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular = response.

 

Paul

=

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: = webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: [webfinger] = Looking for JRDs

 

Working on some WF code... = looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD = wrangling.  Suggestions? = -T

 

--
You received this = message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID = Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop = receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com= .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 =
 

--
You received this message because you = are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" = group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from = it, send an email to openi= d-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, = visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 =
 

 






_______________=
________________________________
webfinger mailing =
list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf=
.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 





___________________=
____________________________
webfinger mailing =
list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf=
.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 




_______________________=
________________________
webfinger mailing =
list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf=
.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 

------=_NextPart_000_0671_01CE87DB.284EE610-- From melvincarvalho@gmail.com Wed Jul 24 09:58:21 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB4DA11E80F2 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:58:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fv9dYHfyDZse for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:58:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x229.google.com (mail-la0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B21C21F8B04 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:58:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f41.google.com with SMTP id fn20so530554lab.28 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:58:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=AtijdWRL03MvKJKHBj05HPH0NLFgWMDEv03qwodD9n8=; b=r8FhqXDLqCi4EolzQW8rDF1dqucSlkkVPDyjldX2n+bFb1S9VJ9Vc3fEw4lSeyOV/X Y7pEiaBEukGhbr2Oj6KnuGQyEIngeceXh5BY1KXuV5jJA+b+zAcs3I7lGphYKX5r+m0s OFZLm1Rue67l3Y8o0ZXfFITSNKc2BzD1P05abvqC0M1tcNTZnEab0qUS1Eb3AgRdATql YBYdKfy6yVheFzcsHdtZcuPcQqVcju5vN7sUwGEiWwOb/w35xJyptieUHhzbo4cRX9/m B2ag0zZTE5IAoie/6pGCfAE39fkvftmRq+lBzQ1KOU2MJKUAlqilUvbfqNjQHN+h2NN3 s0FQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.157.137 with SMTP id wm9mr16822336lbb.14.1374685084484; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:58:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.59.193 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:58:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <032701ce86e5$27b2dff0$77189fd0$@packetizer.com> References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> <0a1140f5-24d9-4be6-aab4-1ae6a3d63c0c@email.android.com> <032701ce86e5$27b2dff0$77189fd0$@packetizer.com> Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:58:04 +0200 Message-ID: From: Melvin Carvalho To: "Paul E. Jones" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c29654238c2604e244d0f6 Cc: webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 16:58:21 -0000 --001a11c29654238c2604e244d0f6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 22 July 2013 16:10, Paul E. Jones wrote: > Melvin,**** > > ** ** > > It=92s easy enough to replace strings in URIs should data need to be > ported. I suggest we remove the word =93absolute=94 where we currently h= ave > =93absolute URI=94 and then introduce a new paragraph in the terminology > section as follows:**** > > ** ** > > The use of URIs throughout this document refers to URIs following the > syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986. Relative URIs, having syntax > following that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger.**= * > * > > ** ** > > Is that clear? > Hi Paul, currently "Absolute URI" occurs only in section 4.4 (ie the description of JRD). Certainly I think the 'absolute' should be removed in section 4.4. The RFC in essence describes two things, 1. the webfinger protocol 2. the JRD definition This restriction on relative URIs applies to (2), rather than, the whole document, but as it happens that turns out to be the same thing Side note: in other situations I like relative URIs because they can be moved from one location to another in a non-breaking way. Say I have /about/ /photos/ /blog/ at one location, I can move them to another without having to worry too much. Therefore, if JRD was ever used in a context outside of webfinger, that would be a slight advantage. > **** > > ** ** > > Paul**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM > *To:* Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger > > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones wrote:**** > > In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate question > would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be absolute, but not > following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead just following "URI".= * > *** > > Yes, that's a good question. Generally relative URIs are relative to the > document, but they need not be. For example they could be relative by > default to the [supposed] webfinger registry. In JSON LD they have a > @context variable which allows quite a bit of flexibility in this regard. > I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered a must in standards based > serialization (I suspect not) but they have the advantage of slightly > increased data portability.**** > > **** > > Paul**** > > ** ** > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Melvin Carvalho > *Sent:* Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013**** > > > *To:* "Paul E. Jones" **** > > *Cc:* webfinger **** > > > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones wrote:**** > > Folks, > > One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those > identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". This > term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have = a > concrete meaning, namely this: > > absolute-URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] > > And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD > specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to > the > above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs > (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). > > I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the > intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, > but to require the standard URI syntax: > > URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]**** > > ** ** > > There are many ways that people do this, see: > > http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces**** > > **** > > > Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute" > that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have an > opinion on this?**** > > ** ** > > +1 on allowing relative URIs**** > > **** > > > Paul > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > --001a11c29654238c2604e244d0f6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On 22 July 2013 16:10, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Melvin,

=A0<= /p>

It=92s easy enough to = replace strings in URIs should data need to be ported.=A0 I suggest we remo= ve the word =93absolute=94 where we currently have =93absolute URI=94 and t= hen introduce a new paragraph in the terminology section as follows:=

=A0<= /p>

The use of URIs throughout this document refers to URIs following the = syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986.=A0 Relative URIs, having syntax = following that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger.<= /u>

=A0<= /p>

Is that clear?<= /p>


Hi Paul, currently "Absol= ute URI" occurs only in section 4.4 (ie the description of JRD).=A0 Ce= rtainly I think the 'absolute' should be removed in section 4.4.=A0=

The RFC in essence describes two things,

1. the webf= inger protocol
2. the JRD definition

This restriction on relative= URIs applies to (2), rather than, the whole document, but as it happens th= at turns out to be the same thing

Side note: in other situations I like relative URIs because they can be= moved from one location to another in a non-breaking way.=A0 Say I have /a= bout/ /photos/ /blog/ at one location, I can move them to another without h= aving to worry too much.=A0 Therefore, if JRD was ever used in a context ou= tside of webfinger, that would be a slight advantage.
=A0

=A0<= /p>

Paul

=A0<= /p>

From: Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM
To: Paul E. Jones
<= b>Cc: webfinger


Subject: Re= : [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI

=A0

=A0

=A0

= On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:=

In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate ques= tion would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be abso= lute, but not following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead= just following "URI".

Yes, that's a good question.=A0 Gener= ally relative URIs are relative to the document, but they need not be.=A0 F= or example they could be relative by default to the [supposed] webfinger re= gistry.=A0 In JSON LD they have a @context variable which allows quite a bi= t of flexibility in this regard.=A0 I'm unsure if relative URIs are con= sidered a must in standards based serialization (I suspect not) but they ha= ve the advantage of slightly increased data portability.

=A0

Paul

=A0

From: Melvin C= arvalho <m= elvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013


To: "Paul E. Jones" <= ;paulej@packetiz= er.com>

Cc: webf= inger <webfinger= @ietf.org>


Subject: Re: [webfinger]= Absolute URI vs URI

=A0

=A0

=

=A0

=A0

On 22 July 2013 07:47, P= aul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Folks,

One of the requirements in the JRD spe= c is that certain URIs (e.g., those
identifying link relation types and = properties) be "absolute URIs". =A0This
term has been a point = of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a
concrete meaning, namely this:

=A0 =A0 =A0absolute-URI =A0=3D scheme= ":" hier-part [ "?" query ]

And the term is use= d, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD
specification. =A0H= owever, it was not clear to me whether that referred to the
above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs
(= i.e., those lacking a scheme specified).

I had an exchange with Eran= Hammer and Mark Nottingham. =A0I believe the
intent of that language wa= s not to require the above constrained syntax,
but to require the standard URI syntax:

=A0 =A0 =A0URI =3D scheme &q= uot;:" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]=

=A0

=

There are many ways that people do this, see:

http:= //tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces<= /p>

=A0


Given that= understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute" that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. =A0Do other= s have an
opinion on this?

=A0

+1 on= allowing relative URIs

=A0


Paul

_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing listwebfinger@ietf.or= g
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

=A0

=

=A0


--001a11c29654238c2604e244d0f6-- From ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com Wed Jul 24 10:19:58 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 108C311E80DF for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 10:19:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W7T5v+sIf6vI for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 10:19:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ye0-f173.google.com (mail-ye0-f173.google.com [209.85.213.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF6DD21F8F78 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 10:19:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ye0-f173.google.com with SMTP id m7so2974733yen.32 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 10:19:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to:x-mailer:x-gm-message-state; bh=rVsFBVByJoLoh0A4nqyQ+jjRtIBkRG2MuZh3rHiV6/k=; b=pvBU1M3USIL1uL1dwuUC+ERha72tzyBF1D1jnag2kWYB0xpDIeAdVnXPJ7uLLpZ4yA FbDeXvGVg4WAIhwbOpuuHxVHg/8Ts6n+ErEKeRchbst4GofktMeknecFtad3hqFonGyF t9myD5lbFhFFPYHC/v7eNcaNUK7HhHbumu0RRseGe5I0hqShuVdHVKLb19HKeiFzLQqc gHC5yI5U7o96MSCWjXZJMKVWt5SHlius0wQQJ2oMMgkEXIxssOq7O5mDG7ruYSKM0+au V262wRJNY6fj9AhB0TDkn5ByDJVSpdBZpzoI0/iDPABpFgacJPDjGLeaG9Ni/kNHPHzm uBhg== X-Received: by 10.236.123.210 with SMTP id v58mr17981147yhh.64.1374686391998; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 10:19:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.216] (190-20-19-75.baf.movistar.cl. [190.20.19.75]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id m64sm53079196yho.25.2013.07.24.10.19.48 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 24 Jul 2013 10:19:50 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_8C29DE06-9094-4C58-86C6-BDE0EE191D89"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) From: John Bradley In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 13:19:00 -0400 Message-Id: <979B65CA-EC87-4D98-9FA0-67822BEC0DFF@ve7jtb.com> References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> <0a1140f5-24d9-4be6-aab4-1ae6a3d63c0c@email.android.com> <032701ce86e5$27b2dff0$77189fd0$@packetizer.com> To: Melvin Carvalho X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlMZs6ksC8J+XUYdhOBqaXQFUtLHK6itqzBuiSkwWkndt1oALPxNQmAsW1tBohy6AqADNUp Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 17:19:58 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_8C29DE06-9094-4C58-86C6-BDE0EE191D89 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B7A1828A-2535-425B-B9F4-12DC3299CCDC" --Apple-Mail=_B7A1828A-2535-425B-B9F4-12DC3299CCDC Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Relative URI are not useful without a base to be relative to. Unless we = say how to determine the base of a relative URI they should not be = allowed. I an imagine several ways to determine a base but without specifying it = applications will not behave consistently. The JRD is not a HTML = document. John B. On 2013-07-24, at 12:58 PM, Melvin Carvalho = wrote: >=20 >=20 >=20 > On 22 July 2013 16:10, Paul E. Jones wrote: > Melvin, >=20 > =20 >=20 > It=92s easy enough to replace strings in URIs should data need to be = ported. I suggest we remove the word =93absolute=94 where we currently = have =93absolute URI=94 and then introduce a new paragraph in the = terminology section as follows: >=20 > =20 >=20 > The use of URIs throughout this document refers to URIs following the = syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986. Relative URIs, having syntax = following that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Is that clear? >=20 >=20 > Hi Paul, currently "Absolute URI" occurs only in section 4.4 (ie the = description of JRD). Certainly I think the 'absolute' should be removed = in section 4.4. =20 >=20 > The RFC in essence describes two things,=20 >=20 > 1. the webfinger protocol > 2. the JRD definition >=20 > This restriction on relative URIs applies to (2), rather than, the = whole document, but as it happens that turns out to be the same thing >=20 > Side note: in other situations I like relative URIs because they can = be moved from one location to another in a non-breaking way. Say I have = /about/ /photos/ /blog/ at one location, I can move them to another = without having to worry too much. Therefore, if JRD was ever used in a = context outside of webfinger, that would be a slight advantage. > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > Paul >=20 > =20 >=20 > From: Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com]=20 > Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM > To: Paul E. Jones > Cc: webfinger >=20 >=20 > Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones wrote: >=20 > In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate = question would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be = absolute, but not following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead = just following "URI". >=20 > Yes, that's a good question. Generally relative URIs are relative to = the document, but they need not be. For example they could be relative = by default to the [supposed] webfinger registry. In JSON LD they have a = @context variable which allows quite a bit of flexibility in this = regard. I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered a must in standards = based serialization (I suspect not) but they have the advantage of = slightly increased data portability. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Paul >=20 > =20 >=20 > From: Melvin Carvalho > Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013 >=20 >=20 > To: "Paul E. Jones" >=20 > Cc: webfinger >=20 >=20 > Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones wrote: >=20 > Folks, >=20 > One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., = those > identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". = This > term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to = have a > concrete meaning, namely this: >=20 > absolute-URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] >=20 > And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD > specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred = to the > above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs > (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). >=20 > I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the > intent of that language was not to require the above constrained = syntax, > but to require the standard URI syntax: >=20 > URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] >=20 > =20 >=20 > There are many ways that people do this, see: >=20 > http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces >=20 > =20 >=20 >=20 > Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word = "absolute" > that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have = an > opinion on this? >=20 > =20 >=20 > +1 on allowing relative URIs >=20 > =20 >=20 >=20 > Paul >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger --Apple-Mail=_B7A1828A-2535-425B-B9F4-12DC3299CCDC Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 melvincarvalho@gmail.com> = wrote:




On 22 July 2013 16:10, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Melvin,

 

It=92s easy enough to replace strings in URIs = should data need to be ported.  I suggest we remove the word = =93absolute=94 where we currently have =93absolute URI=94 and then = introduce a new paragraph in the terminology section as = follows:

 

The use of URIs throughout this document refers to = URIs following the syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986.  = Relative URIs, having syntax following that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, = are not used with WebFinger.

 

Is that clear?


Hi Paul, currently "Absolute URI" = occurs only in section 4.4 (ie the description of JRD).  Certainly = I think the 'absolute' should be removed in section 4.4. 

The RFC in essence describes two things,

1. the = webfinger protocol
2. the JRD definition

This restriction on = relative URIs applies to (2), rather than, the whole document, but as it = happens that turns out to be the same thing

Side note: in other situations I like relative URIs because they can = be moved from one location to another in a non-breaking way.  Say I = have /about/ /photos/ /blog/ at one location, I can move them to another = without having to worry too much.  Therefore, if JRD was ever used = in a context outside of webfinger, that would be a slight advantage.
 

 

Paul

 

From: Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM
To: Paul E. = Jones
Cc: webfinger


Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs = URI

 

 

 

On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate = question would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be = absolute, but not following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead = just following "URI".

Yes, that's a good question.  = Generally relative URIs are relative to the document, but they need not = be.  For example they could be relative by default to the = [supposed] webfinger registry.  In JSON LD they have a @context = variable which allows quite a bit of flexibility in this regard.  = I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered a must in standards based = serialization (I suspect not) but they have the advantage of slightly = increased data portability.

 

Paul

 

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT = 2013


To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>

Cc: webfinger <webfinger@ietf.org>


Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs = URI

 

 

 

 

On= 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> = wrote:

Folks,

One of the = requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., = those
identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute = URIs".  This
term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 = uses the term to have a
concrete meaning, namely this:

     absolute-URI =  =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ]

And the term is = used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD
specification. =  However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to the
above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative = URIs
(i.e., those lacking a scheme specified).

I had an = exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham.  I believe = the
intent of that language was not to require the above constrained = syntax,
but to require the standard URI syntax:

     URI =3D= scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment = ]

 

There are many ways that people do this, see:

http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-p= ieces

 


Given= that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute"
that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec.  Do others = have an
opinion on this?

 

+1 on allowing relative URIs

 


Paul


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing = list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 

 

=

_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing = list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.i= etf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


2013/7/22 John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>
Yes +1.

=
On 2013-07-22, at 10:10 AM, "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Melvin,
=A0
It=92s easy enough t= o replace strings in URIs should data need to be ported.=A0 I suggest we re= move the word =93absolute=94 where we currently have =93absolute URI=94 and= then introduce a new paragraph in the terminology section as follows:
=A0
The use of URIs throughout this document refers to URIs following t= he syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986.=A0 Relative URIs, having synt= ax following that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger.<= u>
=A0
Is that clear?
=A0
Paul
=A0
<= div style=3D"border-style:solid none none;border-top-width:1pt;border-top-c= olor:rgb(181,196,223);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
From:=A0Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com]=A0
Sent:=A0Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM
To:=A0Paul E. Jones
Cc:=A0webfinger
Subj= ect:=A0Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI
=A0
=A0

=A0=

On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones <p= aulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate question wou= ld be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be absolute, bu= t not following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead just fo= llowing "URI".

Yes, that's a good question.=A0 Gener= ally relative URIs are relative to the document, but they need not be.=A0 F= or example they could be relative by default to the [supposed] webfinger re= gistry.=A0 In JSON LD they have a @context variable which allows quite a bi= t of flexibility in this regard.=A0 I'm unsure if relative URIs are con= sidered a must in standards based serialization (I suspect not) but they ha= ve the advantage of slightly increased data portability.
=A0

Paul

=A0

From:=A0Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Sent:=A0Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013

To:=A0"Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc:<= /b>=A0webfinger <webfinger@ietf.org>=

Subject:=A0Re: [webfinger] Absolute U= RI vs URI
=A0
=A0
=A0
<= div>
=A0
On 22 July 2013 07:47, P= aul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com= > wrote:
Folks,

One of the requirements in the JRD spe= c is that certain URIs (e.g., those
identifying link relation types and = properties) be "absolute URIs". =A0This
term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a<= br>concrete meaning, namely this:

=A0 =A0 =A0absolute-URI =A0=3D sch= eme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ]

And the term is = used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD
specification. =A0However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to = the
above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative UR= Is
(i.e., those lacking a scheme specified).

I had an exchange wi= th Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. =A0I believe the
intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax,but to require the standard URI syntax:

=A0 =A0 =A0URI =3D scheme &= quot;:" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]
=A0
There are many ways that people do this, see:

http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/m= any-ways-slice-url-name-pieces
=A0

Given that understanding, I believe we should re= move the word "absolute"
that appears in front of "URI&qu= ot; in the WebFinger spec. =A0Do others have an
opinion on this?
+1 on allowing relative URIs
=A0

Paul


________________________________= _______________
webfinger mailing list
= webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/ma= ilman/listinfo/webfinger
=A0
=A0
____________________= ___________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/w= ebfinger


________________________= _______________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger




--
Nat Saki= mura (=3Dnat)
Chairman, OpenID Foundation
http://nat.sakimura.org/
@_nat_en

= = --Apple-Mail=_B7A1828A-2535-425B-B9F4-12DC3299CCDC-- --Apple-Mail=_8C29DE06-9094-4C58-86C6-BDE0EE191D89 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=smime.p7s Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name=smime.p7s Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIN8TCCBjQw ggQcoAMCAQICASAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwfTELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0 Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxKTAn BgNVBAMTIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTA3MTAyNDIxMDI1NVoX DTE3MTAyNDIxMDI1NVowgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSsw KQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFy dENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMsohUWcASz7GfKrpTOMKqANy9BV7V0igWdGxA8IU77L3aTxErQ+ fcxtDYZ36Z6GH0YFn7fq5RADteP0AYzrCA+EQTfi8q1+kA3m0nwtwXG94M5sIqsvs7lRP1aycBke /s5g9hJHryZ2acScnzczjBCAo7X1v5G3yw8MDP2m2RCye0KfgZ4nODerZJVzhAlOD9YejvAXZqHk sw56HzElVIoYSZ3q4+RJuPXXfIoyby+Y2m1E+YzX5iCZXBx05gk6MKAW1vaw4/v2OOLy6FZH3XHH tOkzUreG//CsFnB9+uaYSlR65cdGzTsmoIK8WH1ygoXhRBm98SD7Hf/r3FELNvUCAwEAAaOCAa0w ggGpMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgEGMB0GA1UdDgQWBBSuVYNv7DHKufcd +q9rMfPIHeOsuzAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBROC+8apEBbpRdphzDKNGhD0EGu8jBmBggrBgEFBQcBAQRa MFgwJwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGG2h0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jYTAtBggrBgEFBQcwAoYh aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vc2ZzY2EuY3J0MFsGA1UdHwRUMFIwJ6AloCOGIWh0dHA6 Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3Nmc2NhLmNybDAnoCWgI4YhaHR0cDovL2NybC5zdGFydHNzbC5j b20vc2ZzY2EuY3JsMIGABgNVHSAEeTB3MHUGCysGAQQBgbU3AQIBMGYwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwNAYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKGh0dHA6Ly93d3cu c3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2ludGVybWVkaWF0ZS5wZGYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggIBADqpJw3I07QW ke9plNBpxUxcffc7nUrIQpJHDci91DFG7fVhHRkMZ1J+BKg5UNUxIFJ2Z9B90Micc/NXcs7kPBRd n6XGO/vPc87Y6R+cWS9Nc9+fp3Enmsm94OxOwI9wn8qnr/6o3mD4noP9JphwUPTXwHovjavRnhUQ HLfo/i2NG0XXgTHXS2Xm0kVUozXqpYpAdumMiB/vezj1QHQJDmUdPYMcp+reg9901zkyT3fDW/iv JVv6pWtkh6Pw2ytZT7mvg7YhX3V50Nv860cV11mocUVcqBLv0gcT+HBDYtbuvexNftwNQKD5193A 7zN4vG7CTYkXxytSjKuXrpEatEiFPxWgb84nVj25SU5q/r1Xhwby6mLhkbaXslkVtwEWT3Van49r KjlK4XrUKYYWtnfzq6aSak5u0Vpxd1rY79tWhD3EdCvOhNz/QplNa+VkIsrcp7+8ZhP1l1b2U6Ma xIVteuVMD3X0vziIwr7jxYae9FZjbxlpUemqXjcC0QaFfN7qI0JsQMALL7iGRBg7K0CoOBzECdD3 fuZil5kU/LP9cr1BK31U0Uy651bFnAMMMkqhAChIbn0ei72VnbpSsrrSdF0BAGYQ8vyHae5aCg+H 75dVCV33K6FuxZrf09yTz+Vx/PkdRUYkXmZz/OTfyJXsUOUXrym6KvI2rYpccSk5MIIHtTCCBp2g AwIBAgICHlwwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENv bSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYD VQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTAeFw0x MjAzMTgwNDMyNDhaFw0xNDAzMTkxMTA3MzJaMIGbMRkwFwYDVQQNExBHclRNNkxTN1gzNTc3OHM5 MQswCQYDVQQGEwJDTDEiMCAGA1UECBMZTWV0cm9wb2xpdGFuYSBkZSBTYW50aWFnbzEWMBQGA1UE BxMNSXNsYSBkZSBNYWlwbzEVMBMGA1UEAxMMSm9obiBCcmFkbGV5MR4wHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFg9q YnJhZGxleUBtZS5jb20wggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQCySuUEj3esFMs5 AZLAhPpyjp0DD+vAM+tFeXr8XahzgoOf5A3oJ0V4ejTwfzjpUlL0IOMsq+cr2NvHGzjBip6cp09v eODO3yhztv1le1aQ6CzGAx/p0Fn8g+biVYGkJtKvex4MYNcSmITaVNleejtzbk6C5HgTpBqFykcA FmN4RYrrmYwfbmCahF/kxjWTeq67nL4UJgIcTaLBTmPOr6YjceYbn35QwUvHV+NX7NOyVHDbpxAM L+56nCN5hKnxLbqF9aKlVbBCPiOz8LtGg+2+3aLJ5T4tIfzWMbjCUBae2I4bVa2hdS5dZJwTGFyI p4pYKd6bL2qqbFF8moFE54aVAgMBAAGjggQOMIIECjAJBgNVHRMEAjAAMAsGA1UdDwQEAwIEsDAd BgNVHSUEFjAUBggrBgEFBQcDAgYIKwYBBQUHAwQwHQYDVR0OBBYEFD8Dv8LEoSfOmqZmUvP2JpAz Lbh5MB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFK5Vg2/sMcq59x36r2sx88gd46y7MH4GA1UdEQR3MHWBD2picmFkbGV5 QG1lLmNvbYEPamJyYWRsZXlAbWUuY29tgRBqYnJhZGxleUBtYWMuY29tgRF2ZTdqdGJAdmU3anRi LmNvbYETamJyYWRsZXlAd2luZ2FhLmNvbYEXam9obi5icmFkbGV5QHdpbmdhYS5jb20wggIhBgNV HSAEggIYMIICFDCCAhAGCysGAQQBgbU3AQICMIIB/zAuBggrBgEFBQcCARYiaHR0cDovL3d3dy5z dGFydHNzbC5jb20vcG9saWN5LnBkZjA0BggrBgEFBQcCARYoaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5j b20vaW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjCB9wYIKwYBBQUHAgIwgeowJxYgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNh dGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwAwIBARqBvlRoaXMgY2VydGlmaWNhdGUgd2FzIGlzc3VlZCBhY2NvcmRp bmcgdG8gdGhlIENsYXNzIDIgVmFsaWRhdGlvbiByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29t IENBIHBvbGljeSwgcmVsaWFuY2Ugb25seSBmb3IgdGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHB1cnBvc2UgaW4gY29t cGxpYW5jZSBvZiB0aGUgcmVseWluZyBwYXJ0eSBvYmxpZ2F0aW9ucy4wgZwGCCsGAQUFBwICMIGP MCcWIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MAMCAQIaZExpYWJpbGl0eSBhbmQg d2FycmFudGllcyBhcmUgbGltaXRlZCEgU2VlIHNlY3Rpb24gIkxlZ2FsIGFuZCBMaW1pdGF0aW9u cyIgb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENBIHBvbGljeS4wNgYDVR0fBC8wLTAroCmgJ4YlaHR0cDovL2Ny bC5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vY3J0dTItY3JsLmNybDCBjgYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgYEwfzA5BggrBgEFBQcw AYYtaHR0cDovL29jc3Auc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3N1Yi9jbGFzczIvY2xpZW50L2NhMEIGCCsGAQUF BzAChjZodHRwOi8vYWlhLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jZXJ0cy9zdWIuY2xhc3MyLmNsaWVudC5jYS5j cnQwIwYDVR0SBBwwGoYYaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IB AQARx8Pg+Yetf5bfNo/8qxHiDAsAvRRNozPXhIieDpr0XeRvxkNtNSd5L25uCmp4lA/YgVzRTmBC cndd4Ifqn0jzya+bU2opDDxa9+CVLRohLX29+lOBclI90g7Ykk9GpoG1d/fOR1cnByRf3900yssZ 4a9oVP19Q11B0dTgEjWlVSmAqvv3pPstNz8RF8fyIWnX4KZ1WQnpjaIl1ZSniHXteZvFshPQJ1Lh JKT9VbwsWyf+ZXPqEHvdW2HCMawiS7nhanilG6rUpf6kBOdGTekdFrXPebEkyars4RcQ1wJWb5sC fJSthtSKU1L1RVNhLz/d1WwqI26kFo5k7686AmpUMYIDbDCCA2gCAQEwgZMwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYT AklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0 aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJt ZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQQICHlwwCQYFKw4DAhoFAKCCAa0wGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3 DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNMTMwNzI0MTcxOTAxWjAjBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxFgQUtkTaqNeS rlE1ZN5WCiSzhXG1CEkwgaQGCSsGAQQBgjcQBDGBljCBkzCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNV BAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNp Z25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMTL1N0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDIgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUgQ2xp ZW50IENBAgIeXDCBpgYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAgsxgZaggZMwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQK Ew1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWdu aW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVu dCBDQQICHlwwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAEggEAQusynUBmOBA7mX6ybdEsRONYH5whM/ARGxrMAlCQ w7pFNV6eDWL6YIM2FDTzFDjOO5XNWfAVqwdEvxN9aM43i0MbV4YtuSVXVDWfCT62q6VZBWgptLVe Xt6EA+cQJZmSuNrGzayjAZ0R7vA03HdFU3EyND+7tYCDMUZdq8K20TvXaMqmUUEE4VpqlfVz8aa4 +NuBzPTk/Ymu1wfPQfTp3R4ZV2Ix04avGtpoZ8O0gv5O3FVXCeJD2pxzd4M6lf0oeySIjHnLG6Ly RRCDPTDOm+yjbo/bC9jH4M8wOUKjEAV4vyZvKuGDIyg0JlNK5X7+7Jidt6r9FDYDWNYe+ZEBcQAA AAAAAA== --Apple-Mail=_8C29DE06-9094-4C58-86C6-BDE0EE191D89-- From melvincarvalho@gmail.com Wed Jul 24 12:13:17 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E334011E8215 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:13:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cLwoAITpAhVY for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:13:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x22d.google.com (mail-la0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C18A711E8242 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:13:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f45.google.com with SMTP id ev20so643243lab.4 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:13:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=kteA71tLG/U5I5qo91OVh9gXmBvIUT7WwUeltxESGOs=; b=yhBip2EMPNDJIj6Y5DEuJF0RFeBSMe2droeEF4v763RJX7FB2PIhPjCBkcm3tZ2asL 5otU8U+DMroQy2hEfBWdadAnRNIb3fAGAnHTbJyb0+ksSGyp1HmaP0XzLYr0c88oY85U XbUA3F6MS6H2wguPqx4mLtbwCgn6Mlj9zw/Q0GySOLDLhhtrmLB1tSXqv4vzmnVu4XjI T3PxghCImUkUc6yDvgUQKv6BY19HRCm2ubBMkbJqncEAgp2VYm1IPFLWYp/Zj5Zn8TGu GA2DKMre39N8Uz8FH876MJBFev0x1h3vFyB/0ItTL/YzdUPgEBdVtyVIOJr1r+3ivkdb lkmA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.115.142 with SMTP id jo14mr17414253lab.87.1374693192588; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:13:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.59.193 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:13:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <979B65CA-EC87-4D98-9FA0-67822BEC0DFF@ve7jtb.com> References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> <0a1140f5-24d9-4be6-aab4-1ae6a3d63c0c@email.android.com> <032701ce86e5$27b2dff0$77189fd0$@packetizer.com> <979B65CA-EC87-4D98-9FA0-67822BEC0DFF@ve7jtb.com> Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 21:13:12 +0200 Message-ID: From: Melvin Carvalho To: John Bradley Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3504c6b62a804e246b309 Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:13:18 -0000 --001a11c3504c6b62a804e246b309 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 24 July 2013 19:19, John Bradley wrote: > Relative URI are not useful without a base to be relative to. Unless we > say how to determine the base of a relative URI they should not be allowe= d. > > I an imagine several ways to determine a base but without specifying it > applications will not behave consistently. The JRD is not a HTML docume= nt. > Sure. I wasnt trying to imply the JRD was the same as an HTML document. Relative URIs, can be used in many contexts such as html/json/xml do indeed require a base. I think the following text from RFC 3986, "5.1. Establishing a Base URI" would be relevant here, and it's referred to by JSON LD too http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-5.1 > > John B. > > On 2013-07-24, at 12:58 PM, Melvin Carvalho > wrote: > > > > > On 22 July 2013 16:10, Paul E. Jones wrote: > >> Melvin,**** >> >> ** ** >> >> It=92s easy enough to replace strings in URIs should data need to be >> ported. I suggest we remove the word =93absolute=94 where we currently = have >> =93absolute URI=94 and then introduce a new paragraph in the terminology >> section as follows:**** >> >> ** ** >> >> The use of URIs throughout this document refers to URIs following the >> syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986. Relative URIs, having syntax >> following that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger.*= * >> ** >> >> ** ** >> >> Is that clear? >> > > Hi Paul, currently "Absolute URI" occurs only in section 4.4 (ie the > description of JRD). Certainly I think the 'absolute' should be removed = in > section 4.4. > > The RFC in essence describes two things, > > 1. the webfinger protocol > 2. the JRD definition > > This restriction on relative URIs applies to (2), rather than, the whole > document, but as it happens that turns out to be the same thing > > Side note: in other situations I like relative URIs because they can be > moved from one location to another in a non-breaking way. Say I have > /about/ /photos/ /blog/ at one location, I can move them to another witho= ut > having to worry too much. Therefore, if JRD was ever used in a context > outside of webfinger, that would be a slight advantage. > > >> **** >> >> ** ** >> >> Paul**** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com] >> *Sent:* Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM >> *To:* Paul E. Jones >> *Cc:* webfinger >> >> *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI**** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones wrote:**** >> >> In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate question >> would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be absolute, but no= t >> following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead just following "URI"= . >> **** >> >> Yes, that's a good question. Generally relative URIs are relative to th= e >> document, but they need not be. For example they could be relative by >> default to the [supposed] webfinger registry. In JSON LD they have a >> @context variable which allows quite a bit of flexibility in this regard= . >> I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered a must in standards based >> serialization (I suspect not) but they have the advantage of slightly >> increased data portability.**** >> >> **** >> >> Paul**** >> >> ** ** >> ------------------------------ >> >> *From:* Melvin Carvalho >> *Sent:* Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013**** >> >> >> *To:* "Paul E. Jones" **** >> >> *Cc:* webfinger **** >> >> >> *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI**** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones wrote:**** >> >> Folks, >> >> One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., thos= e >> identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". Thi= s >> term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have= a >> concrete meaning, namely this: >> >> absolute-URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] >> >> And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD >> specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to >> the >> above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs >> (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). >> >> I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the >> intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, >> but to require the standard URI syntax: >> >> URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]**** >> >> ** ** >> >> There are many ways that people do this, see: >> >> http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces**** >> >> **** >> >> >> Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute" >> that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have an >> opinion on this?**** >> >> ** ** >> >> +1 on allowing relative URIs**** >> >> **** >> >> >> Paul >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webfinger mailing list >> webfinger@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger**** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > > > --001a11c3504c6b62a804e246b309 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On 24 July 2013 19:19, John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com> wrote:
Relative URI are not useful without a base to be relative to. = =A0Unless we say how to determine the base of a relative URI they should no= t be allowed.

I an imagine several ways to determine a base but without sp= ecifying it applications will not behave consistently. =A0 The JRD is not a= HTML document.

Sure.=A0 I wasn= t trying to imply the JRD was the same as an HTML document.=A0 Relative URI= s, can be used in many contexts such as html/json/xml do indeed require a b= ase.=A0 I think the following text from RFC 3986, "5.1.=A0 Establishin= g a Base URI" would be relevant here, and it's referred to by JSON= LD too

=A0

John B.
<= div class=3D"h5">

On 2013-07-24, at 12:58 PM, Melvin Carv= alho <melv= incarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:




On 22 July 2013 16:10, Paul E. Jones = <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Me= lvin,

=A0

<= p class=3D"">It=92s easy enough to replace = strings in URIs should data need to be ported.=A0 I suggest we remove the w= ord =93absolute=94 where we currently have =93absolute URI=94 and then intr= oduce a new paragraph in the terminology section as follows:<= /span>

=A0

<= p class=3D"" style=3D"margin-left:0.5in">Th= e use of URIs throughout this document refers to URIs following the syntax = specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986.=A0 Relative URIs, having syntax followi= ng that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger.<= /u>

=A0

<= p class=3D"">Is that clear?


Hi Paul, currently "Absolute UR= I" occurs only in section 4.4 (ie the description of JRD).=A0 Certainl= y I think the 'absolute' should be removed in section 4.4.=A0

The RFC in essence describes two things,

1. the webf= inger protocol
2. the JRD definition

This restriction on relative= URIs applies to (2), rather than, the whole document, but as it happens th= at turns out to be the same thing

Side note: in other situations I like relative URIs because they can be= moved from one location to another in a non-breaking way.=A0 Say I have /a= bout/ /photos/ /blog/ at one location, I can move them to another without h= aving to worry too much.=A0 Therefore, if JRD was ever used in a context ou= tside of webfinger, that would be a slight advantage.
=A0

=A0

<= p class=3D"">Paul

=A0

<= div style=3D"border-width:medium medium medium 1.5pt;border-style:none none= none solid;border-color:-moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-t= ext-color blue;padding:0in 0in 0in 4pt">

From: = Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM
To: Paul E. Jones
<= b>Cc: webfinger


Subject: Re: [webfinger]= Absolute URI vs URI

=A0

=A0<= u>

=A0=

On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com&g= t; wrote:

In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate ques= tion would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be abso= lute, but not following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead= just following "URI".

Yes, that's a good question.=A0 Generally rela= tive URIs are relative to the document, but they need not be.=A0 For exampl= e they could be relative by default to the [supposed] webfinger registry.= =A0 In JSON LD they have a @context variable which allows quite a bit of fl= exibility in this regard.=A0 I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered= a must in standards based serialization (I suspect not) but they have the = advantage of slightly increased data portability.

=A0

Paul

=A0

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com= >
Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013


To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com&= gt;

Cc: webfinger <webfinger@ietf.org= >


Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute U= RI vs URI

=A0

=A0

=A0

=A0

On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:=

Folks,

One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that= certain URIs (e.g., those
identifying link relation types and propertie= s) be "absolute URIs". =A0This
term has been a point of confus= ion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a
concrete meaning, namely this:

=A0 =A0 =A0absolute-URI =A0=3D scheme= ":" hier-part [ "?" query ]

And the term is use= d, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD
specification. =A0H= owever, it was not clear to me whether that referred to the
above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs
(= i.e., those lacking a scheme specified).

I had an exchange with Eran= Hammer and Mark Nottingham. =A0I believe the
intent of that language wa= s not to require the above constrained syntax,
but to require the standard URI syntax:

=A0 =A0 =A0URI =3D scheme &q= uot;:" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]=

=A0

There are many ways that people do this, see:

http:= //tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces<= /p>

=A0


Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the = word "absolute"
that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. =A0Do other= s have an
opinion on this?

=A0

+1 on allowing relative= URIs

=A0


Paul


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing listwebfinger@ietf.or= g
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

=A0

=A0

=

_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing listwebfinger@ietf.or= g
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


--001a11c3504c6b62a804e246b309-- From ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com Wed Jul 24 12:24:41 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B967E11E8252 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:24:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aA3oG5TWsncZ for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:24:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gg0-f178.google.com (mail-gg0-f178.google.com [209.85.161.178]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6225011E8144 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:23:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-gg0-f178.google.com with SMTP id l12so144237gge.37 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:23:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to:x-mailer:x-gm-message-state; bh=YXgHEJ+lsE9Z9WUuwJNb5z0Z1bYn0m4WzoN4B5UXIgE=; b=Rjw+b2kxIX4W8DzmijGmm8aUNk1qZcMa+w3/9woxLt73gmZ6KAqHerX4Eh03GhCdhX 1vHOvfN6QR736zf/0Z8ogA8zshStXVydYXFGbwEuYJVcHCwa+0DM1M7ohQIvNPT53Cs5 VDakFl7OkJST+re4wktUb9up051nDVShz2HoaSLha4CSv9oCFnmNFretTmV0pDehd5gy PQbhqBak9WW5GQrWMegK/GSQpGwxEaq4HNL7bJWxmYz8RUqHWn+spri1Zv68avQ6acvO ft+zM/FCfv6/4NsmGN/4vO90pK6HA8bdhsdg44fVE2Dyih6EdahtoPZwtObMANVk+ZKG Bulg== X-Received: by 10.236.37.38 with SMTP id x26mr17654607yha.123.1374693827222; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:23:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.216] (190-20-17-87.baf.movistar.cl. [190.20.17.87]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id y70sm53711978yhe.15.2013.07.24.12.23.43 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:23:45 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5D26C9E4-9DDE-4C0E-817B-E50E3356FC63"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) From: John Bradley In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:22:55 -0400 Message-Id: <3C2FEB8C-8685-488D-94EB-1582E9B7BC8E@ve7jtb.com> References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> <0a1140f5-24d9-4be6-aab4-1ae6a3d63c0c@email.android.com> <032701ce86e5$27b2dff0$77189fd0$@packetizer.com> <979B65CA-EC87-4D98-9FA0-67822BEC0DFF@ve7jtb.com> To: Melvin Carvalho X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlUoeEc8Ub03wiQoSJx8IZD7tShnlr4iB5452G3MXpXG1SjQto1fnDuXmlppomfUnhkvySg Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:24:41 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_5D26C9E4-9DDE-4C0E-817B-E50E3356FC63 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6CDD9692-4BBB-4B05-82AE-0746F5A1B91D" --Apple-Mail=_6CDD9692-4BBB-4B05-82AE-0746F5A1B91D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 I don't personally think the additional flexibility is worth the interop = issues likely to be created by different parsers of the JRD attempting = to interpret the base. John B. On 2013-07-24, at 3:13 PM, Melvin Carvalho = wrote: >=20 >=20 >=20 > On 24 July 2013 19:19, John Bradley wrote: > Relative URI are not useful without a base to be relative to. Unless = we say how to determine the base of a relative URI they should not be = allowed. >=20 > I an imagine several ways to determine a base but without specifying = it applications will not behave consistently. The JRD is not a HTML = document. >=20 > Sure. I wasnt trying to imply the JRD was the same as an HTML = document. Relative URIs, can be used in many contexts such as = html/json/xml do indeed require a base. I think the following text from = RFC 3986, "5.1. Establishing a Base URI" would be relevant here, and = it's referred to by JSON LD too >=20 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-5.1 > =20 >=20 > John B. >=20 > On 2013-07-24, at 12:58 PM, Melvin Carvalho = wrote: >=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On 22 July 2013 16:10, Paul E. Jones wrote: >> Melvin, >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> It=92s easy enough to replace strings in URIs should data need to be = ported. I suggest we remove the word =93absolute=94 where we currently = have =93absolute URI=94 and then introduce a new paragraph in the = terminology section as follows: >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> The use of URIs throughout this document refers to URIs following the = syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986. Relative URIs, having syntax = following that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger. >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> Is that clear? >>=20 >>=20 >> Hi Paul, currently "Absolute URI" occurs only in section 4.4 (ie the = description of JRD). Certainly I think the 'absolute' should be removed = in section 4.4. =20 >>=20 >> The RFC in essence describes two things,=20 >>=20 >> 1. the webfinger protocol >> 2. the JRD definition >>=20 >> This restriction on relative URIs applies to (2), rather than, the = whole document, but as it happens that turns out to be the same thing >>=20 >> Side note: in other situations I like relative URIs because they can = be moved from one location to another in a non-breaking way. Say I have = /about/ /photos/ /blog/ at one location, I can move them to another = without having to worry too much. Therefore, if JRD was ever used in a = context outside of webfinger, that would be a slight advantage. >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> Paul >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> From: Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com]=20 >> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM >> To: Paul E. Jones >> Cc: webfinger >>=20 >>=20 >> Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones wrote: >>=20 >> In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate = question would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be = absolute, but not following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead = just following "URI". >>=20 >> Yes, that's a good question. Generally relative URIs are relative to = the document, but they need not be. For example they could be relative = by default to the [supposed] webfinger registry. In JSON LD they have a = @context variable which allows quite a bit of flexibility in this = regard. I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered a must in standards = based serialization (I suspect not) but they have the advantage of = slightly increased data portability. >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> Paul >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> From: Melvin Carvalho >> Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013 >>=20 >>=20 >> To: "Paul E. Jones" >>=20 >> Cc: webfinger >>=20 >>=20 >> Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones wrote: >>=20 >> Folks, >>=20 >> One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., = those >> identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". = This >> term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to = have a >> concrete meaning, namely this: >>=20 >> absolute-URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] >>=20 >> And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD >> specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred = to the >> above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative = URIs >> (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). >>=20 >> I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe = the >> intent of that language was not to require the above constrained = syntax, >> but to require the standard URI syntax: >>=20 >> URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> There are many ways that people do this, see: >>=20 >> http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >>=20 >> Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word = "absolute" >> that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have = an >> opinion on this? >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> +1 on allowing relative URIs >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >>=20 >> Paul >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> webfinger mailing list >> webfinger@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> webfinger mailing list >> webfinger@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger >=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail=_6CDD9692-4BBB-4B05-82AE-0746F5A1B91D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 I = don't personally think the additional flexibility is worth the interop = issues likely to be created by different parsers of the JRD attempting = to interpret the base.

John = B.

On 2013-07-24, at 3:13 PM, Melvin = Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> = wrote:




On 24 July 2013 19:19, John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com> wrote:
Relative URI are not useful without a = base to be relative to.  Unless we say how to determine the base of = a relative URI they should not be allowed.

I an imagine several ways to determine a base but without = specifying it applications will not behave consistently.   The JRD = is not a HTML = document.

Sure.  I = wasnt trying to imply the JRD was the same as an HTML document.  = Relative URIs, can be used in many contexts such as html/json/xml do = indeed require a base.  I think the following text from RFC 3986, = "5.1.  Establishing a Base URI" would be relevant here, and it's = referred to by JSON LD too

 

John = B.

On 2013-07-24, at 12:58 PM, = Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:




On 22 July 2013 = 16:10, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Melvin,

 

It=92s easy enough to replace strings in URIs = should data need to be ported.  I suggest we remove the word = =93absolute=94 where we currently have =93absolute URI=94 and then = introduce a new paragraph in the terminology section as = follows:

 

The use of URIs throughout this document = refers to URIs following the syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC = 3986.  Relative URIs, having syntax following that of Section 4.2 = or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger.

 

Is that clear?


Hi Paul, currently "Absolute URI" = occurs only in section 4.4 (ie the description of JRD).  Certainly = I think the 'absolute' should be removed in section 4.4. 

The RFC in essence describes two things,

1. the = webfinger protocol
2. the JRD definition

This restriction on = relative URIs applies to (2), rather than, the whole document, but as it = happens that turns out to be the same thing

Side note: in other situations I like relative URIs because they can = be moved from one location to another in a non-breaking way.  Say I = have /about/ /photos/ /blog/ at one location, I can move them to another = without having to worry too much.  Therefore, if JRD was ever used = in a context outside of webfinger, that would be a slight advantage.
 

 

Paul

 

From: Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM
To: Paul E. = Jones
Cc: webfinger


Subject: Re: = [webfinger] Absolute URI vs = URI

 

 

 

On= 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate = question would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be = absolute, but not following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead = just following "URI".

Yes, that's a good question.  Generally = relative URIs are relative to the document, but they need not be.  = For example they could be relative by default to the [supposed] = webfinger registry.  In JSON LD they have a @context variable which = allows quite a bit of flexibility in this regard.  I'm unsure if = relative URIs are considered a must in standards based serialization (I = suspect not) but they have the advantage of slightly increased data = portability.

 

Paul

 

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT = 2013


To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>

Cc: webfinger <webfinger@ietf.org>


Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs = URI

 

 

 

 

On 22 July 2013 = 07:47, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> = wrote:

Folks,

One of the = requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., = those
identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute = URIs".  This
term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 = uses the term to have a
concrete meaning, namely this:

     absolute-URI =  =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ]

And the term is = used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD
specification. =  However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to the
above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative = URIs
(i.e., those lacking a scheme specified).

I had an = exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham.  I believe = the
intent of that language was not to require the above constrained = syntax,
but to require the standard URI syntax:

     URI =3D= scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment = ]

 

There are many ways that people do this, see:

http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-p= ieces

 


Given that = understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute"
that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec.  Do others = have an
opinion on this?

 

+1 on = allowing relative URIs

 


Paul


= _______________________________________________
webfinger mailing = list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 

 


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing = list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger
=



= --Apple-Mail=_6CDD9692-4BBB-4B05-82AE-0746F5A1B91D-- --Apple-Mail=_5D26C9E4-9DDE-4C0E-817B-E50E3356FC63 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=smime.p7s Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name=smime.p7s Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIN8TCCBjQw ggQcoAMCAQICASAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwfTELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0 Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxKTAn BgNVBAMTIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTA3MTAyNDIxMDI1NVoX DTE3MTAyNDIxMDI1NVowgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSsw KQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFy dENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMsohUWcASz7GfKrpTOMKqANy9BV7V0igWdGxA8IU77L3aTxErQ+ fcxtDYZ36Z6GH0YFn7fq5RADteP0AYzrCA+EQTfi8q1+kA3m0nwtwXG94M5sIqsvs7lRP1aycBke /s5g9hJHryZ2acScnzczjBCAo7X1v5G3yw8MDP2m2RCye0KfgZ4nODerZJVzhAlOD9YejvAXZqHk sw56HzElVIoYSZ3q4+RJuPXXfIoyby+Y2m1E+YzX5iCZXBx05gk6MKAW1vaw4/v2OOLy6FZH3XHH tOkzUreG//CsFnB9+uaYSlR65cdGzTsmoIK8WH1ygoXhRBm98SD7Hf/r3FELNvUCAwEAAaOCAa0w ggGpMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgEGMB0GA1UdDgQWBBSuVYNv7DHKufcd +q9rMfPIHeOsuzAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBROC+8apEBbpRdphzDKNGhD0EGu8jBmBggrBgEFBQcBAQRa MFgwJwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGG2h0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jYTAtBggrBgEFBQcwAoYh aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vc2ZzY2EuY3J0MFsGA1UdHwRUMFIwJ6AloCOGIWh0dHA6 Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3Nmc2NhLmNybDAnoCWgI4YhaHR0cDovL2NybC5zdGFydHNzbC5j b20vc2ZzY2EuY3JsMIGABgNVHSAEeTB3MHUGCysGAQQBgbU3AQIBMGYwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwNAYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKGh0dHA6Ly93d3cu c3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2ludGVybWVkaWF0ZS5wZGYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggIBADqpJw3I07QW ke9plNBpxUxcffc7nUrIQpJHDci91DFG7fVhHRkMZ1J+BKg5UNUxIFJ2Z9B90Micc/NXcs7kPBRd n6XGO/vPc87Y6R+cWS9Nc9+fp3Enmsm94OxOwI9wn8qnr/6o3mD4noP9JphwUPTXwHovjavRnhUQ HLfo/i2NG0XXgTHXS2Xm0kVUozXqpYpAdumMiB/vezj1QHQJDmUdPYMcp+reg9901zkyT3fDW/iv JVv6pWtkh6Pw2ytZT7mvg7YhX3V50Nv860cV11mocUVcqBLv0gcT+HBDYtbuvexNftwNQKD5193A 7zN4vG7CTYkXxytSjKuXrpEatEiFPxWgb84nVj25SU5q/r1Xhwby6mLhkbaXslkVtwEWT3Van49r KjlK4XrUKYYWtnfzq6aSak5u0Vpxd1rY79tWhD3EdCvOhNz/QplNa+VkIsrcp7+8ZhP1l1b2U6Ma xIVteuVMD3X0vziIwr7jxYae9FZjbxlpUemqXjcC0QaFfN7qI0JsQMALL7iGRBg7K0CoOBzECdD3 fuZil5kU/LP9cr1BK31U0Uy651bFnAMMMkqhAChIbn0ei72VnbpSsrrSdF0BAGYQ8vyHae5aCg+H 75dVCV33K6FuxZrf09yTz+Vx/PkdRUYkXmZz/OTfyJXsUOUXrym6KvI2rYpccSk5MIIHtTCCBp2g AwIBAgICHlwwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENv bSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYD VQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTAeFw0x MjAzMTgwNDMyNDhaFw0xNDAzMTkxMTA3MzJaMIGbMRkwFwYDVQQNExBHclRNNkxTN1gzNTc3OHM5 MQswCQYDVQQGEwJDTDEiMCAGA1UECBMZTWV0cm9wb2xpdGFuYSBkZSBTYW50aWFnbzEWMBQGA1UE BxMNSXNsYSBkZSBNYWlwbzEVMBMGA1UEAxMMSm9obiBCcmFkbGV5MR4wHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFg9q YnJhZGxleUBtZS5jb20wggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQCySuUEj3esFMs5 AZLAhPpyjp0DD+vAM+tFeXr8XahzgoOf5A3oJ0V4ejTwfzjpUlL0IOMsq+cr2NvHGzjBip6cp09v eODO3yhztv1le1aQ6CzGAx/p0Fn8g+biVYGkJtKvex4MYNcSmITaVNleejtzbk6C5HgTpBqFykcA FmN4RYrrmYwfbmCahF/kxjWTeq67nL4UJgIcTaLBTmPOr6YjceYbn35QwUvHV+NX7NOyVHDbpxAM L+56nCN5hKnxLbqF9aKlVbBCPiOz8LtGg+2+3aLJ5T4tIfzWMbjCUBae2I4bVa2hdS5dZJwTGFyI p4pYKd6bL2qqbFF8moFE54aVAgMBAAGjggQOMIIECjAJBgNVHRMEAjAAMAsGA1UdDwQEAwIEsDAd BgNVHSUEFjAUBggrBgEFBQcDAgYIKwYBBQUHAwQwHQYDVR0OBBYEFD8Dv8LEoSfOmqZmUvP2JpAz Lbh5MB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFK5Vg2/sMcq59x36r2sx88gd46y7MH4GA1UdEQR3MHWBD2picmFkbGV5 QG1lLmNvbYEPamJyYWRsZXlAbWUuY29tgRBqYnJhZGxleUBtYWMuY29tgRF2ZTdqdGJAdmU3anRi LmNvbYETamJyYWRsZXlAd2luZ2FhLmNvbYEXam9obi5icmFkbGV5QHdpbmdhYS5jb20wggIhBgNV HSAEggIYMIICFDCCAhAGCysGAQQBgbU3AQICMIIB/zAuBggrBgEFBQcCARYiaHR0cDovL3d3dy5z dGFydHNzbC5jb20vcG9saWN5LnBkZjA0BggrBgEFBQcCARYoaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5j b20vaW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjCB9wYIKwYBBQUHAgIwgeowJxYgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNh dGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwAwIBARqBvlRoaXMgY2VydGlmaWNhdGUgd2FzIGlzc3VlZCBhY2NvcmRp bmcgdG8gdGhlIENsYXNzIDIgVmFsaWRhdGlvbiByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29t IENBIHBvbGljeSwgcmVsaWFuY2Ugb25seSBmb3IgdGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHB1cnBvc2UgaW4gY29t cGxpYW5jZSBvZiB0aGUgcmVseWluZyBwYXJ0eSBvYmxpZ2F0aW9ucy4wgZwGCCsGAQUFBwICMIGP MCcWIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MAMCAQIaZExpYWJpbGl0eSBhbmQg d2FycmFudGllcyBhcmUgbGltaXRlZCEgU2VlIHNlY3Rpb24gIkxlZ2FsIGFuZCBMaW1pdGF0aW9u cyIgb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENBIHBvbGljeS4wNgYDVR0fBC8wLTAroCmgJ4YlaHR0cDovL2Ny bC5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vY3J0dTItY3JsLmNybDCBjgYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgYEwfzA5BggrBgEFBQcw AYYtaHR0cDovL29jc3Auc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3N1Yi9jbGFzczIvY2xpZW50L2NhMEIGCCsGAQUF BzAChjZodHRwOi8vYWlhLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jZXJ0cy9zdWIuY2xhc3MyLmNsaWVudC5jYS5j cnQwIwYDVR0SBBwwGoYYaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IB AQARx8Pg+Yetf5bfNo/8qxHiDAsAvRRNozPXhIieDpr0XeRvxkNtNSd5L25uCmp4lA/YgVzRTmBC cndd4Ifqn0jzya+bU2opDDxa9+CVLRohLX29+lOBclI90g7Ykk9GpoG1d/fOR1cnByRf3900yssZ 4a9oVP19Q11B0dTgEjWlVSmAqvv3pPstNz8RF8fyIWnX4KZ1WQnpjaIl1ZSniHXteZvFshPQJ1Lh JKT9VbwsWyf+ZXPqEHvdW2HCMawiS7nhanilG6rUpf6kBOdGTekdFrXPebEkyars4RcQ1wJWb5sC fJSthtSKU1L1RVNhLz/d1WwqI26kFo5k7686AmpUMYIDbDCCA2gCAQEwgZMwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYT AklMMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0 aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJt ZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQQICHlwwCQYFKw4DAhoFAKCCAa0wGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3 DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNMTMwNzI0MTkyMjU2WjAjBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxFgQUCOtf39Ye FporCJem3WtXDryYLv0wgaQGCSsGAQQBgjcQBDGBljCBkzCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNV BAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNp Z25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMTL1N0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDIgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUgQ2xp ZW50IENBAgIeXDCBpgYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAgsxgZaggZMwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYwFAYDVQQK Ew1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBTaWdu aW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAyIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlIENsaWVu dCBDQQICHlwwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAEggEAOwH+QDK+hyJSackMFrjk8Pgs0VmVpv/G5dynMHWE 3nVLeYkUbvG2PYMcGglJ8CP/1UezSZzt8qCBvV9nvZSvtCaE2AC+wuBJR6vLglEBBkDXqpj9Szza yFJpn0xdPgsGs5C5Vs1NSQ6i4or6fQholmK9b/P9/b8F+5/an9QQNd3Cy74zdnkKRW3tCy+iEi4r /tPO11vnxYmvB3H1j8ohO8avrV0KxmC1SVleJ4E3Juh4cJv1osHXi8oXL2YQC6XbQF8TBWjVcKB4 1/CLUK3x1/h16DYCVTVXx56NXMg6OjUgZ4JeTiUrMJBzmV3Rr1vBg1iwSEjyYWzpPz+e4yauBwAA AAAAAA== --Apple-Mail=_5D26C9E4-9DDE-4C0E-817B-E50E3356FC63-- From Michael.Jones@microsoft.com Wed Jul 24 12:42:33 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 519CE11E8105 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:42:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.223 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.223 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.625, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HiKaOC-l1k34 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:42:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from db9outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (mail-db9lp0250.outbound.messaging.microsoft.com [213.199.154.250]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83DAE11E8144 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:42:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail113-db9-R.bigfish.com (10.174.16.240) by DB9EHSOBE024.bigfish.com (10.174.14.87) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.22; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:42:26 +0000 Received: from mail113-db9 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail113-db9-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 865A81401E8; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:42:26 +0000 (UTC) X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:131.107.125.8; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com; RD:autodiscover.service.exchange.microsoft.com; EFVD:NLI X-SpamScore: -23 X-BigFish: VS-23(zz98dI9371I936eIc85fhzz1f42h208ch1ee6h1de0h1fdah2073h1202h1e76h1d1ah1d2ah1fc6hzz1d7338h1de098h1033IL177df4h17326ah8275dh18c673h1de097h1de096h8275bhz2fh2a8h668h839hd25hf0ah1288h12a5h12bdh137ah1441h1504h1537h153bh15d0h162dh1631h1758h18e1h1946h19b5h19ceh1b0ah1bceh1d0ch1d2eh1d3fh1dfeh1dffh1e1dh1155h) Received-SPF: pass (mail113-db9: domain of microsoft.com designates 131.107.125.8 as permitted sender) client-ip=131.107.125.8; envelope-from=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; helo=TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ; icrosoft.com ; Received: from mail113-db9 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail113-db9 (MessageSwitch) id 1374694944978783_15053; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:42:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from DB9EHSMHS016.bigfish.com (unknown [10.174.16.253]) by mail113-db9.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E53804C0046; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:42:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (131.107.125.8) by DB9EHSMHS016.bigfish.com (10.174.14.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.16.227.3; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:42:24 +0000 Received: from TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.1.38]) by TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.79.174]) with mapi id 14.03.0136.001; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:42:21 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: John Bradley , Melvin Carvalho Thread-Topic: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI Thread-Index: Ac6GnKy2JFrOlkfaRR6rWfzmXK/DegACoJ+AAAC3lYAAAikigAAMnTsAAGpz1wAAALspAAAD/QcAAABW34AAAKcXoA== Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:42:19 +0000 Message-ID: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B70C2B4@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> <0a1140f5-24d9-4be6-aab4-1ae6a3d63c0c@email.android.com> <032701ce86e5$27b2dff0$77189fd0$@packetizer.com> <979B65CA-EC87-4D98-9FA0-67822BEC0DFF@ve7jtb.com> <3C2FEB8C-8685-488D-94EB-1582E9B7BC8E@ve7jtb.com> In-Reply-To: <3C2FEB8C-8685-488D-94EB-1582E9B7BC8E@ve7jtb.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.33] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B70C2B4TK5EX14MBXC284r_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%0$Dn%*$RO%0$TLS%0$FQDN%$TlsDn% Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:42:33 -0000 --_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B70C2B4TK5EX14MBXC284r_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Agreed. We should continue to just specify the use of absolute URIs - for = simplification and interop reasons. -- Mike From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Beh= alf Of John Bradley Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 12:23 PM To: Melvin Carvalho Cc: Paul E. Jones; webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI I don't personally think the additional flexibility is worth the interop is= sues likely to be created by different parsers of the JRD attempting to int= erpret the base. John B. On 2013-07-24, at 3:13 PM, Melvin Carvalho > wrote: On 24 July 2013 19:19, John Bradley > wrote: Relative URI are not useful without a base to be relative to. Unless we sa= y how to determine the base of a relative URI they should not be allowed. I an imagine several ways to determine a base but without specifying it app= lications will not behave consistently. The JRD is not a HTML document. Sure. I wasnt trying to imply the JRD was the same as an HTML document. R= elative URIs, can be used in many contexts such as html/json/xml do indeed = require a base. I think the following text from RFC 3986, "5.1. Establish= ing a Base URI" would be relevant here, and it's referred to by JSON LD too http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-5.1 John B. On 2013-07-24, at 12:58 PM, Melvin Carvalho > wrote: On 22 July 2013 16:10, Paul E. Jones > wrote: Melvin, It's easy enough to replace strings in URIs should data need to be ported. = I suggest we remove the word "absolute" where we currently have "absolute = URI" and then introduce a new paragraph in the terminology section as follo= ws: The use of URIs throughout this document refers to URIs following the synta= x specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986. Relative URIs, having syntax followi= ng that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger. Is that clear? Hi Paul, currently "Absolute URI" occurs only in section 4.4 (ie the descri= ption of JRD). Certainly I think the 'absolute' should be removed in secti= on 4.4. The RFC in essence describes two things, 1. the webfinger protocol 2. the JRD definition This restriction on relative URIs applies to (2), rather than, the whole do= cument, but as it happens that turns out to be the same thing Side note: in other situations I like relative URIs because they can be mov= ed from one location to another in a non-breaking way. Say I have /about/ = /photos/ /blog/ at one location, I can move them to another without having = to worry too much. Therefore, if JRD was ever used in a context outside of= webfinger, that would be a slight advantage. Paul From: Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones > wrote: In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate question wou= ld be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be absolute, but not foll= owing the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead just following "URI". Yes, that's a good question. Generally relative URIs are relative to the d= ocument, but they need not be. For example they could be relative by defau= lt to the [supposed] webfinger registry. In JSON LD they have a @context v= ariable which allows quite a bit of flexibility in this regard. I'm unsure= if relative URIs are considered a must in standards based serialization (I= suspect not) but they have the advantage of slightly increased data portab= ility. Paul ________________________________ From: Melvin Carvalho > Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013 To: "Paul E. Jones" > Cc: webfinger > Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones > wrote: Folks, One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". This term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a concrete meaning, namely this: absolute-URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to th= e above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, but to require the standard URI syntax: URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] There are many ways that people do this, see: http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute" that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have an opinion on this? +1 on allowing relative URIs Paul _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger --_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B70C2B4TK5EX14MBXC284r_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Agreed.  We should c= ontinue to just specify the use of absolute URIs – for simplification= and interop reasons.

 <= /p>

    &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;     -- Mike

 <= /p>

From: webfinge= r-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of John Bradley
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 12:23 PM
To: Melvin Carvalho
Cc: Paul E. Jones; webfinger
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI

 

I don't personally think the additional flexibility = is worth the interop issues likely to be created by different parsers of th= e JRD attempting to interpret the base.

 

John B.

 

On 2013-07-24, at 3:13 PM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wro= te:



 

 

On 24 July 2013 19:19, John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com> wrote:=

Relative URI are not useful without a base to be rel= ative to.  Unless we say how to determine the base of a relative URI t= hey should not be allowed.

 

I an imagine several ways to determine a base but wi= thout specifying it applications will not behave consistently.   The J= RD is not a HTML document.

 

Sure.  I wasnt t= rying to imply the JRD was the same as an HTML document.  Relative URI= s, can be used in many contexts such as html/json/xml do indeed require a b= ase.  I think the following text from RFC 3986, "5.1.  Establishing a Base URI" would be relevant here, and= it's referred to by JSON LD too

 

 

John B.

 

On 2013-07-24, at 12:58 PM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gm= ail.com> wrote:



 

 

On 22 July 2013 16:10, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com&g= t; wrote:

Melvin,

 

It’s easy enough to replace strin= gs in URIs should data need to be ported.  I suggest we remove the word “absolute” where we currently have “absolute URI= 221; and then introduce a new paragraph in the terminology section as follo= ws:

 

The use of URIs throughout this document refers = to URIs following the syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986.  Rela= tive URIs, having syntax following that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger.

 

Is that clear?

 

Hi Paul, currently &q= uot;Absolute URI" occurs only in section 4.4 (ie the description of JR= D).  Certainly I think the 'absolute' should be removed in section 4.4= . 

The RFC in essence describes two things,

1. the webfinger protocol
2. the JRD definition

This restriction on relative URIs applies to (2), rather than, the whole do= cument, but as it happens that turns out to be the same thing

Side note: in other situations I like relative URIs because they can be mov= ed from one location to another in a non-breaking way.  Say I have /ab= out/ /photos/ /blog/ at one location, I can move them to another without ha= ving to worry too much.  Therefore, if JRD was ever used in a context outside of webfinger, that would be a sligh= t advantage.

 

 

Paul

 

From: Melvin Carvalho [mailt= o:melvincarva= lho@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger


Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI

 

 

 

 

On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:=

In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate question = would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be absolute,= but not following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead just= following "URI".

Yes, that's a good question.  Generally relative URIs are rel= ative to the document, but they need not be.  For example they could b= e relative by default to the [supposed] webfinger registry.  In JSON LD they have a @context variable which allows quit= e a bit of flexibility in this regard.  I'm unsure if relative URIs ar= e considered a must in standards based serialization (I suspect not) but th= ey have the advantage of slightly increased data portability.

 

Paul

 

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@= gmail.com>
Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013


To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>

Cc: webfinger <webfinger@ietf.org>


Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI

 

 

 

 

On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:=

Folks,

One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs"= ;.  This
term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a<= br> concrete meaning, namely this:

     absolute-URI  =3D scheme ":" hier-part [= "?" query ]

And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD
specification.  However, it was not clear to me whether that referred = to the
above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs
(i.e., those lacking a scheme specified).

I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham.  I believe the=
intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, but to require the standard URI syntax:

     URI =3D scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" = query ] [ "#" fragment ]

 

There are many ways that people do this, see:

http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pie= ces

 


Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolut= e"
that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec.  Do ot= hers have an
opinion on this?

 

+1 on allowing relative URIs

 


Paul


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 

 

 

_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 

 

 

--_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B70C2B4TK5EX14MBXC284r_-- From paulej@packetizer.com Wed Jul 24 15:01:52 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42B1111E8276 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:01:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Gii4XUg2rYKw for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:01:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8873411E8268 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:01:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [162.177.192.64] (m955a36d0.tmodns.net [208.54.90.149]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6OM1fsM004422 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:01:44 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1374703305; bh=/W9TEyiM/IYIHDeWNrYbucuIqxPYnwx9TG8Y2oiQn6o=; h=In-Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Subject:From: Date:To:CC:Message-ID; b=YFWliGFODCmfb0a798ebiFTSJlxBY8DhJfZNm07rF/7yfNjh+UmZUsKGZ+lVgzLnY Q9Yu0WYxQZwgiVM3YKpnnSweqvYtm7JXygH5BUKxWBATDrfKGNbGVTqcXZmELZnZ+6 MGnaDiQV62zC0RxD9qELa9CAOQgqF11XmX9Cui6U= User-Agent: Kaiten Mail In-Reply-To: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B70C2B4@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> <0a1140f5-24d9-4be6-aab4-1ae6a3d63c0c@email.android.com> <032701ce86e5$27b2dff0$77189fd0$@packetizer.com> <979B65CA-EC87-4D98-9FA0-67822BEC0DFF@ve7jtb.com> <3C2FEB8C-8685-488D-94EB-1582E9B7BC8E@ve7jtb.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B70C2B4@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----8QI2FE0XGAXI8OQKQFWZBOEKNEXFP8" From: "Paul E. Jones" Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:01:39 -0400 To: Mike Jones , John Bradley , Melvin Carvalho Message-ID: <35abf51a-a97f-42d3-b4e0-44707d2975cf@email.android.com> Cc: webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 22:01:52 -0000 ------8QI2FE0XGAXI8OQKQFWZBOEKNEXFP8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mike, I took out the language 'absolute' since an absolute URI actually has a meaning other than what we are all calling absolute. What we want is "URI" per the RFC. Paul -------- Original Message -------- From: Mike Jones Sent: Wed Jul 24 15:42:19 EDT 2013 To: John Bradley , Melvin Carvalho Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , webfinger Subject: RE: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI Agreed. We should continue to just specify the use of absolute URIs - for simplification and interop reasons. -- Mike From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of John Bradley Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 12:23 PM To: Melvin Carvalho Cc: Paul E. Jones; webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI I don't personally think the additional flexibility is worth the interop issues likely to be created by different parsers of the JRD attempting to interpret the base. John B. On 2013-07-24, at 3:13 PM, Melvin Carvalho > wrote: On 24 July 2013 19:19, John Bradley > wrote: Relative URI are not useful without a base to be relative to. Unless we say how to determine the base of a relative URI they should not be allowed. I an imagine several ways to determine a base but without specifying it applications will not behave consistently. The JRD is not a HTML document. Sure. I wasnt trying to imply the JRD was the same as an HTML document. Relative URIs, can be used in many contexts such as html/json/xml do indeed require a base. I think the following text from RFC 3986, "5.1. Establishing a Base URI" would be relevant here, and it's referred to by JSON LD too http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-5.1 John B. On 2013-07-24, at 12:58 PM, Melvin Carvalho > wrote: On 22 July 2013 16:10, Paul E. Jones > wrote: Melvin, It's easy enough to replace strings in URIs should data need to be ported. I suggest we remove the word "absolute" where we currently have "absolute URI" and then introduce a new paragraph in the terminology section as follows: The use of URIs throughout this document refers to URIs following the syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986. Relative URIs, having syntax following that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger. Is that clear? Hi Paul, currently "Absolute URI" occurs only in section 4.4 (ie the description of JRD). Certainly I think the 'absolute' should be removed in section 4.4. The RFC in essence describes two things, 1. the webfinger protocol 2. the JRD definition This restriction on relative URIs applies to (2), rather than, the whole document, but as it happens that turns out to be the same thing Side note: in other situations I like relative URIs because they can be moved from one location to another in a non-breaking way. Say I have /about/ /photos/ /blog/ at one location, I can move them to another without having to worry too much. Therefore, if JRD was ever used in a context outside of webfinger, that would be a slight advantage. Paul From: Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones > wrote: In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate question would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be absolute, but not following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead just following "URI". Yes, that's a good question. Generally relative URIs are relative to the document, but they need not be. For example they could be relative by default to the [supposed] webfinger registry. In JSON LD they have a @context variable which allows quite a bit of flexibility in this regard. I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered a must in standards based serialization (I suspect not) but they have the advantage of slightly increased data portability. Paul ________________________________ From: Melvin Carvalho > Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013 To: "Paul E. Jones" > Cc: webfinger > Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones > wrote: Folks, One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs". This term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a concrete meaning, namely this: absolute-URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD specification. However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to the above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs (i.e., those lacking a scheme specified). I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham. I believe the intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax, but to require the standard URI syntax: URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] There are many ways that people do this, see: http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute" that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec. Do others have an opinion on this? +1 on allowing relative URIs Paul _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger ------8QI2FE0XGAXI8OQKQFWZBOEKNEXFP8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Mike,

I took out the language 'absolute' since an absolute URI actually has a meaning other than what we are all calling absolute. What we want is "URI" per the RFC.

Paul



From: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
Sent: Wed Jul 24 15:42:19 EDT 2013
To: John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Cc: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>, webfinger <webfinger@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI

Agreed.  We should continue to just specify the use of absolute URIs – for simplification and interop reasons.

 

                                                            -- Mike

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of John Bradley
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 12:23 PM
To: Melvin Carvalho
Cc: Paul E. Jones; webfinger
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI

 

I don't personally think the additional flexibility is worth the interop issues likely to be created by different parsers of the JRD attempting to interpret the base.

 

John B.

 

On 2013-07-24, at 3:13 PM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:



 

 

On 24 July 2013 19:19, John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com> wrote:

Relative URI are not useful without a base to be relative to.  Unless we say how to determine the base of a relative URI they should not be allowed.

 

I an imagine several ways to determine a base but without specifying it applications will not behave consistently.   The JRD is not a HTML document.

 

Sure.  I wasnt trying to imply the JRD was the same as an HTML document.  Relative URIs, can be used in many contexts such as html/json/xml do indeed require a base.  I think the following text from RFC 3986, "5.1.  Establishing a Base URI" would be relevant here, and it's referred to by JSON LD too

 

 

John B.

 

On 2013-07-24, at 12:58 PM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:



 

 

On 22 July 2013 16:10, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Melvin,

 

It’s easy enough to replace strings in URIs should data need to be ported.  I suggest we remove the word “absolute” where we currently have “absolute URI” and then introduce a new paragraph in the terminology section as follows:

 

The use of URIs throughout this document refers to URIs following the syntax specified in Section 3 of RFC 3986.  Relative URIs, having syntax following that of Section 4.2 or RFC 3986, are not used with WebFinger.

 

Is that clear?

 

Hi Paul, currently "Absolute URI" occurs only in section 4.4 (ie the description of JRD).  Certainly I think the 'absolute' should be removed in section 4.4. 

The RFC in essence describes two things,

1. the webfinger protocol
2. the JRD definition

This restriction on relative URIs applies to (2), rather than, the whole document, but as it happens that turns out to be the same thing

Side note: in other situations I like relative URIs because they can be moved from one location to another in a non-breaking way.  Say I have /about/ /photos/ /blog/ at one location, I can move them to another without having to worry too much.  Therefore, if JRD was ever used in a context outside of webfinger, that would be a slight advantage.

 

 

Paul

 

From: Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:09 AM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger


Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI

 

 

 

 

On 22 July 2013 09:06, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

In not suggesting we use or allow relative URIs. The immediate question would be "relative to what". I think the URIs should be absolute, but not following the syntax of "absolute-URI", but instead just following "URI".

Yes, that's a good question.  Generally relative URIs are relative to the document, but they need not be.  For example they could be relative by default to the [supposed] webfinger registry.  In JSON LD they have a @context variable which allows quite a bit of flexibility in this regard.  I'm unsure if relative URIs are considered a must in standards based serialization (I suspect not) but they have the advantage of slightly increased data portability.

 

Paul

 

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Sent: Mon Jul 22 02:46:25 EDT 2013


To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>

Cc: webfinger <webfinger@ietf.org>


Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI

 

 

 

 

On 22 July 2013 07:47, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Folks,

One of the requirements in the JRD spec is that certain URIs (e.g., those
identifying link relation types and properties) be "absolute URIs".  This
term has been a point of confusion, since RFC 3986 uses the term to have a
concrete meaning, namely this:

     absolute-URI  = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ]

And the term is used, because that's the term used in the OASIS XRD
specification.  However, it was not clear to me whether that referred to the
above (which I assumed) or referred to URIs that are not relative URIs
(i.e., those lacking a scheme specified).

I had an exchange with Eran Hammer and Mark Nottingham.  I believe the
intent of that language was not to require the above constrained syntax,
but to require the standard URI syntax:

     URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]

 

There are many ways that people do this, see:

http://tantek.com/2011/238/b1/many-ways-slice-url-name-pieces

 


Given that understanding, I believe we should remove the word "absolute"
that appears in front of "URI" in the WebFinger spec.  Do others have an
opinion on this?

 

+1 on allowing relative URIs

 


Paul


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 

 

 

_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 

 

 

------8QI2FE0XGAXI8OQKQFWZBOEKNEXFP8-- From Michael.Jones@microsoft.com Wed Jul 24 15:24:37 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F2B611E811E for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:24:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oT9PlkNwifov for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:24:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from co9outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (co9ehsobe004.messaging.microsoft.com [207.46.163.27]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A428211E80F4 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:24:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail59-co9-R.bigfish.com (10.236.132.234) by CO9EHSOBE040.bigfish.com (10.236.130.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.22; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 22:24:28 +0000 Received: from mail59-co9 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail59-co9-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1C90D80198; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 22:24:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:131.107.125.8; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:TK5EX14HUBC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com; RD:autodiscover.service.exchange.microsoft.com; EFVD:NLI X-SpamScore: -23 X-BigFish: VS-23(zz98dI9371Ic89bh936eIc857hzz1f42h208ch1ee6h1de0h1fdah2073h1202h1e76h1d1ah1d2ah1fc6hzz1d7338h1de098h1033IL177df4h17326ah8275dh18c673h1de097h1de096h8275bhz2fh2a8h668h839hd25hf0ah1288h12a5h12bdh137ah1441h1504h1537h153bh15d0h162dh1631h1758h18e1h1946h19b5h19ceh1b0ah1bceh1d0ch1d2eh1d3fh1dfeh1dffh1e1dh1155h) Received-SPF: pass (mail59-co9: domain of microsoft.com designates 131.107.125.8 as permitted sender) client-ip=131.107.125.8; envelope-from=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; helo=TK5EX14HUBC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ; icrosoft.com ; Received: from mail59-co9 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail59-co9 (MessageSwitch) id 1374704666474204_6924; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 22:24:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from CO9EHSMHS024.bigfish.com (unknown [10.236.132.227]) by mail59-co9.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A2ED70004A; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 22:24:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TK5EX14HUBC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (131.107.125.8) by CO9EHSMHS024.bigfish.com (10.236.130.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.16.227.3; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 22:24:26 +0000 Received: from TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.1.38]) by TK5EX14HUBC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.86.9]) with mapi id 14.03.0136.001; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 22:23:27 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: "Paul E. Jones" , John Bradley , Melvin Carvalho Thread-Topic: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI Thread-Index: Ac6GnKy2JFrOlkfaRR6rWfzmXK/DegACoJ+AAAC3lYAAAikigAAMnTsAAGpz1wAAALspAAAD/QcAAABW34AAAKcXoAAE5BmAAADCRgA= Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 22:23:26 +0000 Message-ID: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B70D9F9@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> References: <028101ce869e$f02cddb0$d0869910$@packetizer.com> <0a1140f5-24d9-4be6-aab4-1ae6a3d63c0c@email.android.com> <032701ce86e5$27b2dff0$77189fd0$@packetizer.com> <979B65CA-EC87-4D98-9FA0-67822BEC0DFF@ve7jtb.com> <3C2FEB8C-8685-488D-94EB-1582E9B7BC8E@ve7jtb.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B70C2B4@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <35abf51a-a97f-42d3-b4e0-44707d2975cf@email.android.com> In-Reply-To: <35abf51a-a97f-42d3-b4e0-44707d2975cf@email.android.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.33] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B70D9F9TK5EX14MBXC284r_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%0$Dn%*$RO%0$TLS%0$FQDN%$TlsDn% Cc: webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Absolute URI vs URI X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 22:24:37 -0000 --_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B70D9F9TK5EX14MBXC284r_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 RmluZSB3aXRoIG1lDQoNCkZyb206IFBhdWwgRS4gSm9uZXMgW21haWx0bzpwYXVsZWpAcGFja2V0 aXplci5jb21dDQpTZW50OiBXZWRuZXNkYXksIEp1bHkgMjQsIDIwMTMgMzowMiBQTQ0KVG86IE1p a2UgSm9uZXM7IEpvaG4gQnJhZGxleTsgTWVsdmluIENhcnZhbGhvDQpDYzogd2ViZmluZ2VyDQpT dWJqZWN0OiBSRTogW3dlYmZpbmdlcl0gQWJzb2x1dGUgVVJJIHZzIFVSSQ0KDQoNCk1pa2UsDQoN CkkgdG9vayBvdXQgdGhlIGxhbmd1YWdlICdhYnNvbHV0ZScgc2luY2UgYW4gYWJzb2x1dGUgVVJJ IGFjdHVhbGx5IGhhcyBhIG1lYW5pbmcgb3RoZXIgdGhhbiB3aGF0IHdlIGFyZSBhbGwgY2FsbGlu ZyBhYnNvbHV0ZS4gV2hhdCB3ZSB3YW50IGlzICJVUkkiIHBlciB0aGUgUkZDLg0KDQpQYXVsDQoN Cl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQpGcm9tOiBNaWtlIEpvbmVzIDxNaWNo YWVsLkpvbmVzQG1pY3Jvc29mdC5jb208bWFpbHRvOk1pY2hhZWwuSm9uZXNAbWljcm9zb2Z0LmNv bT4+DQpTZW50OiBXZWQgSnVsIDI0IDE1OjQyOjE5IEVEVCAyMDEzDQpUbzogSm9obiBCcmFkbGV5 IDx2ZTdqdGJAdmU3anRiLmNvbTxtYWlsdG86dmU3anRiQHZlN2p0Yi5jb20+PiwgTWVsdmluIENh cnZhbGhvIDxtZWx2aW5jYXJ2YWxob0BnbWFpbC5jb208bWFpbHRvOm1lbHZpbmNhcnZhbGhvQGdt YWlsLmNvbT4+DQpDYzogIlBhdWwgRS4gSm9uZXMiIDxwYXVsZWpAcGFja2V0aXplci5jb208bWFp bHRvOnBhdWxlakBwYWNrZXRpemVyLmNvbT4+LCB3ZWJmaW5nZXIgPHdlYmZpbmdlckBpZXRmLm9y ZzxtYWlsdG86d2ViZmluZ2VyQGlldGYub3JnPj4NClN1YmplY3Q6IFJFOiBbd2ViZmluZ2VyXSBB YnNvbHV0ZSBVUkkgdnMgVVJJDQoNCg0KQWdyZWVkLiAgV2Ugc2hvdWxkIGNvbnRpbnVlIHRvIGp1 c3Qgc3BlY2lmeSB0aGUgdXNlIG9mIGFic29sdXRlIFVSSXMg4oCTIGZvciBzaW1wbGlmaWNhdGlv biBhbmQgaW50ZXJvcCByZWFzb25zLg0KDQoNCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIC0tIE1pa2UNCg0KDQpGcm9tOiB3ZWJmaW5n ZXItYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZzxtYWlsdG86d2ViZmluZ2VyLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmc+IFtt YWlsdG86d2ViZmluZ2VyLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmddIE9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZiBKb2huIEJyYWRs ZXkNClNlbnQ6IFdlZG5lc2RheSwgSnVseSAyNCwgMjAxMyAxMjoyMyBQTQ0KVG86IE1lbHZpbiBD YXJ2YWxobw0KQ2M6IFBhdWwgRS4gSm9uZXM7IHdlYmZpbmdlcg0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFt3ZWJm aW5nZXJdIEFic29sdXRlIFVSSSB2cyBVUkkNCg0KDQpJIGRvbid0IHBlcnNvbmFsbHkgdGhpbmsg dGhlIGFkZGl0aW9uYWwgZmxleGliaWxpdHkgaXMgd29ydGggdGhlIGludGVyb3AgaXNzdWVzIGxp a2VseSB0byBiZSBjcmVhdGVkIGJ5IGRpZmZlcmVudCBwYXJzZXJzIG9mIHRoZSBKUkQgYXR0ZW1w dGluZyB0byBpbnRlcnByZXQgdGhlIGJhc2UuDQoNCg0KSm9obiBCLg0KDQoNCk9uIDIwMTMtMDct MjQsIGF0IDM6MTMgUE0sIE1lbHZpbiBDYXJ2YWxobyA8bWVsdmluY2FydmFsaG9AZ21haWwuY29t PG1haWx0bzptZWx2aW5jYXJ2YWxob0BnbWFpbC5jb20+PiB3cm90ZToNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQpPbiAy NCBKdWx5IDIwMTMgMTk6MTksIEpvaG4gQnJhZGxleSA8dmU3anRiQHZlN2p0Yi5jb208bWFpbHRv OnZlN2p0YkB2ZTdqdGIuY29tPj4gd3JvdGU6DQpSZWxhdGl2ZSBVUkkgYXJlIG5vdCB1c2VmdWwg d2l0aG91dCBhIGJhc2UgdG8gYmUgcmVsYXRpdmUgdG8uICBVbmxlc3Mgd2Ugc2F5IGhvdyB0byBk ZXRlcm1pbmUgdGhlIGJhc2Ugb2YgYSByZWxhdGl2ZSBVUkkgdGhleSBzaG91bGQgbm90IGJlIGFs bG93ZWQuDQoNCg0KSSBhbiBpbWFnaW5lIHNldmVyYWwgd2F5cyB0byBkZXRlcm1pbmUgYSBiYXNl IGJ1dCB3aXRob3V0IHNwZWNpZnlpbmcgaXQgYXBwbGljYXRpb25zIHdpbGwgbm90IGJlaGF2ZSBj b25zaXN0ZW50bHkuICAgVGhlIEpSRCBpcyBub3QgYSBIVE1MIGRvY3VtZW50Lg0KDQoNClN1cmUu ICBJIHdhc250IHRyeWluZyB0byBpbXBseSB0aGUgSlJEIHdhcyB0aGUgc2FtZSBhcyBhbiBIVE1M IGRvY3VtZW50LiAgUmVsYXRpdmUgVVJJcywgY2FuIGJlIHVzZWQgaW4gbWFueSBjb250ZXh0cyBz dWNoIGFzIGh0bWwvanNvbi94bWwgZG8gaW5kZWVkIHJlcXVpcmUgYSBiYXNlLiAgSSB0aGluayB0 aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIHRleHQgZnJvbSBSRkMgMzk4NiwgIjUuMS4gIEVzdGFibGlzaGluZyBhIEJh c2UgVVJJIiB3b3VsZCBiZSByZWxldmFudCBoZXJlLCBhbmQgaXQncyByZWZlcnJlZCB0byBieSBK U09OIExEIHRvbw0KaHR0cDovL3Rvb2xzLmlldGYub3JnL2h0bWwvcmZjMzk4NiNzZWN0aW9uLTUu MQ0KDQoNCg0KSm9obiBCLg0KDQoNCk9uIDIwMTMtMDctMjQsIGF0IDEyOjU4IFBNLCBNZWx2aW4g Q2FydmFsaG8gPG1lbHZpbmNhcnZhbGhvQGdtYWlsLmNvbTxtYWlsdG86bWVsdmluY2FydmFsaG9A Z21haWwuY29tPj4gd3JvdGU6DQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KT24gMjIgSnVseSAyMDEzIDE2OjEwLCBQYXVs IEUuIEpvbmVzIDxwYXVsZWpAcGFja2V0aXplci5jb208bWFpbHRvOnBhdWxlakBwYWNrZXRpemVy LmNvbT4+IHdyb3RlOg0KTWVsdmluLA0KDQpJdOKAmXMgZWFzeSBlbm91Z2ggdG8gcmVwbGFjZSBz dHJpbmdzIGluIFVSSXMgc2hvdWxkIGRhdGEgbmVlZCB0byBiZSBwb3J0ZWQuICBJIHN1Z2dlc3Qg d2UgcmVtb3ZlIHRoZSB3b3JkIOKAnGFic29sdXRl4oCdIHdoZXJlIHdlIGN1cnJlbnRseSBoYXZl IOKAnGFic29sdXRlIFVSSeKAnSBhbmQgdGhlbiBpbnRyb2R1Y2UgYSBuZXcgcGFyYWdyYXBoIGlu IHRoZSB0ZXJtaW5vbG9neSBzZWN0aW9uIGFzIGZvbGxvd3M6DQoNClRoZSB1c2Ugb2YgVVJJcyB0 aHJvdWdob3V0IHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgcmVmZXJzIHRvIFVSSXMgZm9sbG93aW5nIHRoZSBzeW50 YXggc3BlY2lmaWVkIGluIFNlY3Rpb24gMyBvZiBSRkMgMzk4Ni4gIFJlbGF0aXZlIFVSSXMsIGhh dmluZyBzeW50YXggZm9sbG93aW5nIHRoYXQgb2YgU2VjdGlvbiA0LjIgb3IgUkZDIDM5ODYsIGFy ZSBub3QgdXNlZCB3aXRoIFdlYkZpbmdlci4NCg0KSXMgdGhhdCBjbGVhcj8NCg0KDQpIaSBQYXVs LCBjdXJyZW50bHkgIkFic29sdXRlIFVSSSIgb2NjdXJzIG9ubHkgaW4gc2VjdGlvbiA0LjQgKGll IHRoZSBkZXNjcmlwdGlvbiBvZiBKUkQpLiAgQ2VydGFpbmx5IEkgdGhpbmsgdGhlICdhYnNvbHV0 ZScgc2hvdWxkIGJlIHJlbW92ZWQgaW4gc2VjdGlvbiA0LjQuDQpUaGUgUkZDIGluIGVzc2VuY2Ug ZGVzY3JpYmVzIHR3byB0aGluZ3MsDQoNCjEuIHRoZSB3ZWJmaW5nZXIgcHJvdG9jb2wNCjIuIHRo ZSBKUkQgZGVmaW5pdGlvbg0KDQpUaGlzIHJlc3RyaWN0aW9uIG9uIHJlbGF0aXZlIFVSSXMgYXBw bGllcyB0byAoMiksIHJhdGhlciB0aGFuLCB0aGUgd2hvbGUgZG9jdW1lbnQsIGJ1dCBhcyBpdCBo YXBwZW5zIHRoYXQgdHVybnMgb3V0IHRvIGJlIHRoZSBzYW1lIHRoaW5nDQoNClNpZGUgbm90ZTog aW4gb3RoZXIgc2l0dWF0aW9ucyBJIGxpa2UgcmVsYXRpdmUgVVJJcyBiZWNhdXNlIHRoZXkgY2Fu IGJlIG1vdmVkIGZyb20gb25lIGxvY2F0aW9uIHRvIGFub3RoZXIgaW4gYSBub24tYnJlYWtpbmcg d2F5LiAgU2F5IEkgaGF2ZSAvYWJvdXQvIC9waG90b3MvIC9ibG9nLyBhdCBvbmUgbG9jYXRpb24s IEkgY2FuIG1vdmUgdGhlbSB0byBhbm90aGVyIHdpdGhvdXQgaGF2aW5nIHRvIHdvcnJ5IHRvbyBt dWNoLiAgVGhlcmVmb3JlLCBpZiBKUkQgd2FzIGV2ZXIgdXNlZCBpbiBhIGNvbnRleHQgb3V0c2lk ZSBvZiB3ZWJmaW5nZXIsIHRoYXQgd291bGQgYmUgYSBzbGlnaHQgYWR2YW50YWdlLg0KDQoNClBh dWwNCg0KRnJvbTogTWVsdmluIENhcnZhbGhvIFttYWlsdG86bWVsdmluY2FydmFsaG9AZ21haWwu Y29tPG1haWx0bzptZWx2aW5jYXJ2YWxob0BnbWFpbC5jb20+XQ0KU2VudDogTW9uZGF5LCBKdWx5 IDIyLCAyMDEzIDQ6MDkgQU0NClRvOiBQYXVsIEUuIEpvbmVzDQpDYzogd2ViZmluZ2VyDQoNClN1 YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbd2ViZmluZ2VyXSBBYnNvbHV0ZSBVUkkgdnMgVVJJDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KT24g MjIgSnVseSAyMDEzIDA5OjA2LCBQYXVsIEUuIEpvbmVzIDxwYXVsZWpAcGFja2V0aXplci5jb208 bWFpbHRvOnBhdWxlakBwYWNrZXRpemVyLmNvbT4+IHdyb3RlOg0KDQpJbiBub3Qgc3VnZ2VzdGlu ZyB3ZSB1c2Ugb3IgYWxsb3cgcmVsYXRpdmUgVVJJcy4gVGhlIGltbWVkaWF0ZSBxdWVzdGlvbiB3 b3VsZCBiZSAicmVsYXRpdmUgdG8gd2hhdCIuIEkgdGhpbmsgdGhlIFVSSXMgc2hvdWxkIGJlIGFi c29sdXRlLCBidXQgbm90IGZvbGxvd2luZyB0aGUgc3ludGF4IG9mICJhYnNvbHV0ZS1VUkkiLCBi dXQgaW5zdGVhZCBqdXN0IGZvbGxvd2luZyAiVVJJIi4NClllcywgdGhhdCdzIGEgZ29vZCBxdWVz dGlvbi4gIEdlbmVyYWxseSByZWxhdGl2ZSBVUklzIGFyZSByZWxhdGl2ZSB0byB0aGUgZG9jdW1l bnQsIGJ1dCB0aGV5IG5lZWQgbm90IGJlLiAgRm9yIGV4YW1wbGUgdGhleSBjb3VsZCBiZSByZWxh dGl2ZSBieSBkZWZhdWx0IHRvIHRoZSBbc3VwcG9zZWRdIHdlYmZpbmdlciByZWdpc3RyeS4gIElu IEpTT04gTEQgdGhleSBoYXZlIGEgQGNvbnRleHQgdmFyaWFibGUgd2hpY2ggYWxsb3dzIHF1aXRl IGEgYml0IG9mIGZsZXhpYmlsaXR5IGluIHRoaXMgcmVnYXJkLiAgSSdtIHVuc3VyZSBpZiByZWxh dGl2ZSBVUklzIGFyZSBjb25zaWRlcmVkIGEgbXVzdCBpbiBzdGFuZGFyZHMgYmFzZWQgc2VyaWFs aXphdGlvbiAoSSBzdXNwZWN0IG5vdCkgYnV0IHRoZXkgaGF2ZSB0aGUgYWR2YW50YWdlIG9mIHNs aWdodGx5IGluY3JlYXNlZCBkYXRhIHBvcnRhYmlsaXR5Lg0KDQoNClBhdWwNCg0KX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCkZyb206IE1lbHZpbiBDYXJ2YWxobyA8bWVsdmluY2Fy dmFsaG9AZ21haWwuY29tPG1haWx0bzptZWx2aW5jYXJ2YWxob0BnbWFpbC5jb20+Pg0KU2VudDog TW9uIEp1bCAyMiAwMjo0NjoyNSBFRFQgMjAxMw0KDQpUbzogIlBhdWwgRS4gSm9uZXMiIDxwYXVs ZWpAcGFja2V0aXplci5jb208bWFpbHRvOnBhdWxlakBwYWNrZXRpemVyLmNvbT4+DQpDYzogd2Vi ZmluZ2VyIDx3ZWJmaW5nZXJAaWV0Zi5vcmc8bWFpbHRvOndlYmZpbmdlckBpZXRmLm9yZz4+DQoN ClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbd2ViZmluZ2VyXSBBYnNvbHV0ZSBVUkkgdnMgVVJJDQoNCg0KDQoNCk9u IDIyIEp1bHkgMjAxMyAwNzo0NywgUGF1bCBFLiBKb25lcyA8cGF1bGVqQHBhY2tldGl6ZXIuY29t PG1haWx0bzpwYXVsZWpAcGFja2V0aXplci5jb20+PiB3cm90ZToNCkZvbGtzLA0KDQpPbmUgb2Yg dGhlIHJlcXVpcmVtZW50cyBpbiB0aGUgSlJEIHNwZWMgaXMgdGhhdCBjZXJ0YWluIFVSSXMgKGUu Zy4sIHRob3NlDQppZGVudGlmeWluZyBsaW5rIHJlbGF0aW9uIHR5cGVzIGFuZCBwcm9wZXJ0aWVz KSBiZSAiYWJzb2x1dGUgVVJJcyIuICBUaGlzDQp0ZXJtIGhhcyBiZWVuIGEgcG9pbnQgb2YgY29u ZnVzaW9uLCBzaW5jZSBSRkMgMzk4NiB1c2VzIHRoZSB0ZXJtIHRvIGhhdmUgYQ0KY29uY3JldGUg bWVhbmluZywgbmFtZWx5IHRoaXM6DQoNCiAgICAgYWJzb2x1dGUtVVJJICA9IHNjaGVtZSAiOiIg aGllci1wYXJ0IFsgIj8iIHF1ZXJ5IF0NCg0KQW5kIHRoZSB0ZXJtIGlzIHVzZWQsIGJlY2F1c2Ug dGhhdCdzIHRoZSB0ZXJtIHVzZWQgaW4gdGhlIE9BU0lTIFhSRA0Kc3BlY2lmaWNhdGlvbi4gIEhv d2V2ZXIsIGl0IHdhcyBub3QgY2xlYXIgdG8gbWUgd2hldGhlciB0aGF0IHJlZmVycmVkIHRvIHRo ZQ0KYWJvdmUgKHdoaWNoIEkgYXNzdW1lZCkgb3IgcmVmZXJyZWQgdG8gVVJJcyB0aGF0IGFyZSBu b3QgcmVsYXRpdmUgVVJJcw0KKGkuZS4sIHRob3NlIGxhY2tpbmcgYSBzY2hlbWUgc3BlY2lmaWVk KS4NCg0KSSBoYWQgYW4gZXhjaGFuZ2Ugd2l0aCBFcmFuIEhhbW1lciBhbmQgTWFyayBOb3R0aW5n aGFtLiAgSSBiZWxpZXZlIHRoZQ0KaW50ZW50IG9mIHRoYXQgbGFuZ3VhZ2Ugd2FzIG5vdCB0byBy ZXF1aXJlIHRoZSBhYm92ZSBjb25zdHJhaW5lZCBzeW50YXgsDQpidXQgdG8gcmVxdWlyZSB0aGUg c3RhbmRhcmQgVVJJIHN5bnRheDoNCg0KICAgICBVUkkgPSBzY2hlbWUgIjoiIGhpZXItcGFydCBb ICI/IiBxdWVyeSBdIFsgIiMiIGZyYWdtZW50IF0NCg0KVGhlcmUgYXJlIG1hbnkgd2F5cyB0aGF0 IHBlb3BsZSBkbyB0aGlzLCBzZWU6DQoNCmh0dHA6Ly90YW50ZWsuY29tLzIwMTEvMjM4L2IxL21h bnktd2F5cy1zbGljZS11cmwtbmFtZS1waWVjZXMNCg0KDQpHaXZlbiB0aGF0IHVuZGVyc3RhbmRp bmcsIEkgYmVsaWV2ZSB3ZSBzaG91bGQgcmVtb3ZlIHRoZSB3b3JkICJhYnNvbHV0ZSINCnRoYXQg YXBwZWFycyBpbiBmcm9udCBvZiAiVVJJIiBpbiB0aGUgV2ViRmluZ2VyIHNwZWMuICBEbyBvdGhl cnMgaGF2ZSBhbg0Kb3BpbmlvbiBvbiB0aGlzPw0KDQorMSBvbiBhbGxvd2luZyByZWxhdGl2ZSBV UklzDQoNCg0KUGF1bA0KDQoNCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fDQp3ZWJmaW5nZXIgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQp3ZWJmaW5nZXJAaWV0Zi5vcmc8bWFp bHRvOndlYmZpbmdlckBpZXRmLm9yZz4NCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlz dGluZm8vd2ViZmluZ2VyDQoNCg0KDQoNCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQp3ZWJmaW5nZXIgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQp3ZWJmaW5nZXJAaWV0Zi5v cmc8bWFpbHRvOndlYmZpbmdlckBpZXRmLm9yZz4NCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxt YW4vbGlzdGluZm8vd2ViZmluZ2VyDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQo= --_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B70D9F9TK5EX14MBXC284r_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6dj0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTp2bWwiIHhtbG5zOm89InVy bjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206b2ZmaWNlOm9mZmljZSIgeG1sbnM6dz0idXJuOnNjaGVt YXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6d29yZCIgeG1sbnM6bT0iaHR0cDovL3NjaGVtYXMubWlj cm9zb2Z0LmNvbS9vZmZpY2UvMjAwNC8xMi9vbW1sIiB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcv VFIvUkVDLWh0bWw0MCI+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIg Y29udGVudD0idGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjxtZXRhIG5hbWU9IkdlbmVyYXRv ciIgY29udGVudD0iTWljcm9zb2Z0IFdvcmQgMTQgKGZpbHRlcmVkIG1lZGl1bSkiPg0KPCEtLVtp ZiAhbXNvXT48c3R5bGU+dlw6KiB7YmVoYXZpb3I6dXJsKCNkZWZhdWx0I1ZNTCk7fQ0Kb1w6KiB7 YmVoYXZpb3I6dXJsKCNkZWZhdWx0I1ZNTCk7fQ0Kd1w6KiB7YmVoYXZpb3I6dXJsKCNkZWZhdWx0 I1ZNTCk7fQ0KLnNoYXBlIHtiZWhhdmlvcjp1cmwoI2RlZmF1bHQjVk1MKTt9DQo8L3N0eWxlPjwh W2VuZGlmXS0tPjxzdHlsZT48IS0tDQovKiBGb250IERlZmluaXRpb25zICovDQpAZm9udC1mYWNl DQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNhbGlicmk7DQoJcGFub3NlLTE6MiAxNSA1IDIgMiAyIDQgMyAyIDQ7 fQ0KQGZvbnQtZmFjZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseTpUYWhvbWE7DQoJcGFub3NlLTE6MiAxMSA2IDQg MyA1IDQgNCAyIDQ7fQ0KLyogU3R5bGUgRGVmaW5pdGlvbnMgKi8NCnAuTXNvTm9ybWFsLCBsaS5N c29Ob3JtYWwsIGRpdi5Nc29Ob3JtYWwNCgl7bWFyZ2luOjBpbjsNCgltYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tOi4w MDAxcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1zaXplOjEyLjBwdDsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiVGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFu Iiwic2VyaWYiO30NCmE6bGluaywgc3Bhbi5Nc29IeXBlcmxpbmsNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXByaW9y aXR5Ojk5Ow0KCWNvbG9yOmJsdWU7DQoJdGV4dC1kZWNvcmF0aW9uOnVuZGVybGluZTt9DQphOnZp c2l0ZWQsIHNwYW4uTXNvSHlwZXJsaW5rRm9sbG93ZWQNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXByaW9yaXR5Ojk5 Ow0KCWNvbG9yOnB1cnBsZTsNCgl0ZXh0LWRlY29yYXRpb246dW5kZXJsaW5lO30NCnANCgl7bXNv LXN0eWxlLXByaW9yaXR5Ojk5Ow0KCW1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1y aWdodDowaW47DQoJbXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG87DQoJbWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6MGlu Ow0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMi4wcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IlRpbWVzIE5ldyBSb21hbiIsInNl cmlmIjt9DQpwLk1zb0FjZXRhdGUsIGxpLk1zb0FjZXRhdGUsIGRpdi5Nc29BY2V0YXRlDQoJe21z by1zdHlsZS1wcmlvcml0eTo5OTsNCgltc28tc3R5bGUtbGluazoiQmFsbG9vbiBUZXh0IENoYXIi Ow0KCW1hcmdpbjowaW47DQoJbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbTouMDAwMXB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZTo4LjBw dDsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiVGFob21hIiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI7fQ0Kc3Bhbi5CYWxsb29uVGV4 dENoYXINCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLW5hbWU6IkJhbGxvb24gVGV4dCBDaGFyIjsNCgltc28tc3R5bGUt cHJpb3JpdHk6OTk7DQoJbXNvLXN0eWxlLWxpbms6IkJhbGxvb24gVGV4dCI7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1p bHk6IlRhaG9tYSIsInNhbnMtc2VyaWYiO30NCnNwYW4uRW1haWxTdHlsZTIwDQoJe21zby1zdHls ZS10eXBlOnBlcnNvbmFsOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI7DQoJ Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RDt9DQpzcGFuLkVtYWlsU3R5bGUyMQ0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtdHlwZTpwZXJz b25hbC1yZXBseTsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FsaWJyaSIsInNhbnMtc2VyaWYiOw0KCWNvbG9y OiMxRjQ5N0Q7fQ0KLk1zb0NocERlZmF1bHQNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6ZXhwb3J0LW9ubHk7 DQoJZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDt9DQpAcGFnZSBXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjENCgl7c2l6ZTo4LjVpbiAx MS4waW47DQoJbWFyZ2luOjEuMGluIDEuMGluIDEuMGluIDEuMGluO30NCmRpdi5Xb3JkU2VjdGlv bjENCgl7cGFnZTpXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjE7fQ0KLS0+PC9zdHlsZT48IS0tW2lmIGd0ZSBtc28gOV0+ PHhtbD4NCjxvOnNoYXBlZGVmYXVsdHMgdjpleHQ9ImVkaXQiIHNwaWRtYXg9IjEwMjYiIC8+DQo8 L3htbD48IVtlbmRpZl0tLT48IS0tW2lmIGd0ZSBtc28gOV0+PHhtbD4NCjxvOnNoYXBlbGF5b3V0 IHY6ZXh0PSJlZGl0Ij4NCjxvOmlkbWFwIHY6ZXh0PSJlZGl0IiBkYXRhPSIxIiAvPg0KPC9vOnNo YXBlbGF5b3V0PjwveG1sPjwhW2VuZGlmXS0tPg0KPC9oZWFkPg0KPGJvZHkgbGFuZz0iRU4tVVMi IGxpbms9ImJsdWUiIHZsaW5rPSJwdXJwbGUiPg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iV29yZFNlY3Rpb24xIj4N CjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQt ZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjoj MUY0OTdEIj5GaW5lIHdpdGggbWU8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNv Tm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtD YWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+PG86cD4m bmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImJvcmRlcjpub25lO2Jv cmRlci10b3A6c29saWQgI0I1QzRERiAxLjBwdDtwYWRkaW5nOjMuMHB0IDBpbiAwaW4gMGluIj4N CjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAuMHB0O2Zv bnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O1RhaG9tYSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7Ij5Gcm9t Ojwvc3Bhbj48L2I+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1 b3Q7VGFob21hJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDsiPiBQYXVsIEUuIEpvbmVzIFtt YWlsdG86cGF1bGVqQHBhY2tldGl6ZXIuY29tXQ0KPGJyPg0KPGI+U2VudDo8L2I+IFdlZG5lc2Rh eSwgSnVseSAyNCwgMjAxMyAzOjAyIFBNPGJyPg0KPGI+VG86PC9iPiBNaWtlIEpvbmVzOyBKb2hu IEJyYWRsZXk7IE1lbHZpbiBDYXJ2YWxobzxicj4NCjxiPkNjOjwvYj4gd2ViZmluZ2VyPGJyPg0K PGI+U3ViamVjdDo8L2I+IFJFOiBbd2ViZmluZ2VyXSBBYnNvbHV0ZSBVUkkgdnMgVVJJPG86cD48 L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxv OnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPHA+TWlrZSw8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxwPkkgdG9vayBv dXQgdGhlIGxhbmd1YWdlICdhYnNvbHV0ZScgc2luY2UgYW4gYWJzb2x1dGUgVVJJIGFjdHVhbGx5 IGhhcyBhIG1lYW5pbmcgb3RoZXIgdGhhbiB3aGF0IHdlIGFyZSBhbGwgY2FsbGluZyBhYnNvbHV0 ZS4gV2hhdCB3ZSB3YW50IGlzICZxdW90O1VSSSZxdW90OyBwZXIgdGhlIFJGQy48bzpwPjwvbzpw PjwvcD4NCjxwPlBhdWw8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxl PSJtYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tOjEyLjBwdCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRp diBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBhbGlnbj0iY2VudGVyIiBzdHlsZT0idGV4dC1hbGlnbjpjZW50 ZXIiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O1RhaG9t YSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7Ij4NCjxociBzaXplPSIzIiB3aWR0aD0iMTAw JSIgYWxpZ249ImNlbnRlciI+DQo8L3NwYW4+PC9kaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48 Yj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtUYWhvbWEm cXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90OyI+RnJvbTo8L3NwYW4+PC9iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxl PSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O1RhaG9tYSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtz YW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7Ij4gTWlrZSBKb25lcyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOk1pY2hhZWwu Sm9uZXNAbWljcm9zb2Z0LmNvbSI+TWljaGFlbC5Kb25lc0BtaWNyb3NvZnQuY29tPC9hPiZndDs8 YnI+DQo8Yj5TZW50OjwvYj4gV2VkIEp1bCAyNCAxNTo0MjoxOSBFRFQgMjAxMzxicj4NCjxiPlRv OjwvYj4gSm9obiBCcmFkbGV5ICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86dmU3anRiQHZlN2p0Yi5jb20i PnZlN2p0YkB2ZTdqdGIuY29tPC9hPiZndDssIE1lbHZpbiBDYXJ2YWxobyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0i bWFpbHRvOm1lbHZpbmNhcnZhbGhvQGdtYWlsLmNvbSI+bWVsdmluY2FydmFsaG9AZ21haWwuY29t PC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8Yj5DYzo8L2I+ICZxdW90O1BhdWwgRS4gSm9uZXMmcXVvdDsgJmx0Ozxh IGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpwYXVsZWpAcGFja2V0aXplci5jb20iPnBhdWxlakBwYWNrZXRpemVyLmNv bTwvYT4mZ3Q7LCB3ZWJmaW5nZXIgJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzp3ZWJmaW5nZXJAaWV0Zi5v cmciPndlYmZpbmdlckBpZXRmLm9yZzwvYT4mZ3Q7PGJyPg0KPGI+U3ViamVjdDo8L2I+IFJFOiBb d2ViZmluZ2VyXSBBYnNvbHV0ZSBVUkkgdnMgVVJJPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxw IGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0 OTdEIj5BZ3JlZWQuJm5ic3A7IFdlIHNob3VsZCBjb250aW51ZSB0byBqdXN0IHNwZWNpZnkgdGhl IHVzZSBvZiBhYnNvbHV0ZSBVUklzIOKAkyBmb3Igc2ltcGxpZmljYXRpb24gYW5kIGludGVyb3Ag cmVhc29ucy48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cD48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iY29sb3I6IzFG NDk3RCI+Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+ PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZx dW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZu YnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNw OyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZu YnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNw OyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZu YnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNw OyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyAt LSBNaWtlPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHA+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImNvbG9yOiMxRjQ5 N0QiPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJib3Jk ZXI6bm9uZTtib3JkZXItdG9wOnNvbGlkICNCNUM0REYgMS4wcHQ7cGFkZGluZzozLjBwdCAwaW4g MGluIDBpbiI+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48Yj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXpl OjEwLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtUYWhvbWEmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZx dW90OyI+RnJvbTo8L3NwYW4+PC9iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAuMHB0O2ZvbnQt ZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O1RhaG9tYSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7Ij4NCjxhIGhy ZWY9Im1haWx0bzp3ZWJmaW5nZXItYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZyI+d2ViZmluZ2VyLWJvdW5jZXNA aWV0Zi5vcmc8L2E+IFs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86d2ViZmluZ2VyLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmci Pm1haWx0bzp3ZWJmaW5nZXItYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZzwvYT5dDQo8Yj5PbiBCZWhhbGYgT2Yg PC9iPkpvaG4gQnJhZGxleTxicj4NCjxiPlNlbnQ6PC9iPiBXZWRuZXNkYXksIEp1bHkgMjQsIDIw MTMgMTI6MjMgUE08YnI+DQo8Yj5Ubzo8L2I+IE1lbHZpbiBDYXJ2YWxobzxicj4NCjxiPkNjOjwv Yj4gUGF1bCBFLiBKb25lczsgd2ViZmluZ2VyPGJyPg0KPGI+U3ViamVjdDo8L2I+IFJlOiBbd2Vi ZmluZ2VyXSBBYnNvbHV0ZSBVUkkgdnMgVVJJPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+ DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxwPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+ SSBkb24ndCBwZXJzb25hbGx5IHRoaW5rIHRoZSBhZGRpdGlvbmFsIGZsZXhpYmlsaXR5IGlzIHdv cnRoIHRoZSBpbnRlcm9wIGlzc3VlcyBsaWtlbHkgdG8gYmUgY3JlYXRlZCBieSBkaWZmZXJlbnQg cGFyc2VycyBvZiB0aGUgSlJEIGF0dGVtcHRpbmcgdG8gaW50ZXJwcmV0IHRoZSBiYXNlLjxvOnA+ PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2 Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+Sm9obiBCLjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8 ZGl2Pg0KPHA+Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBj bGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj5PbiAyMDEzLTA3LTI0LCBhdCAzOjEzIFBNLCBNZWx2aW4gQ2FydmFs aG8gJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzptZWx2aW5jYXJ2YWxob0BnbWFpbC5jb20iPm1lbHZpbmNh cnZhbGhvQGdtYWlsLmNvbTwvYT4mZ3Q7IHdyb3RlOjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8 cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbToxMi4wcHQiPjxvOnA+Jm5i c3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxw PiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPk9uIDI0 IEp1bHkgMjAxMyAxOToxOSwgSm9obiBCcmFkbGV5ICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86dmU3anRi QHZlN2p0Yi5jb20iIHRhcmdldD0iX2JsYW5rIj52ZTdqdGJAdmU3anRiLmNvbTwvYT4mZ3Q7IHdy b3RlOjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPlJlbGF0aXZl IFVSSSBhcmUgbm90IHVzZWZ1bCB3aXRob3V0IGEgYmFzZSB0byBiZSByZWxhdGl2ZSB0by4gJm5i c3A7VW5sZXNzIHdlIHNheSBob3cgdG8gZGV0ZXJtaW5lIHRoZSBiYXNlIG9mIGEgcmVsYXRpdmUg VVJJIHRoZXkgc2hvdWxkIG5vdCBiZSBhbGxvd2VkLjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxw PiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1h bCI+SSBhbiBpbWFnaW5lIHNldmVyYWwgd2F5cyB0byBkZXRlcm1pbmUgYSBiYXNlIGJ1dCB3aXRo b3V0IHNwZWNpZnlpbmcgaXQgYXBwbGljYXRpb25zIHdpbGwgbm90IGJlaGF2ZSBjb25zaXN0ZW50 bHkuICZuYnNwOyBUaGUgSlJEIGlzIG5vdCBhIEhUTUwgZG9jdW1lbnQuPG86cD48L286cD48L3A+ DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+ DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206MTIuMHB0 Ij5TdXJlLiZuYnNwOyBJIHdhc250IHRyeWluZyB0byBpbXBseSB0aGUgSlJEIHdhcyB0aGUgc2Ft ZSBhcyBhbiBIVE1MIGRvY3VtZW50LiZuYnNwOyBSZWxhdGl2ZSBVUklzLCBjYW4gYmUgdXNlZCBp biBtYW55IGNvbnRleHRzIHN1Y2ggYXMgaHRtbC9qc29uL3htbCBkbyBpbmRlZWQgcmVxdWlyZSBh IGJhc2UuJm5ic3A7IEkgdGhpbmsgdGhlIGZvbGxvd2luZyB0ZXh0IGZyb20gUkZDIDM5ODYsDQog JnF1b3Q7NS4xLiZuYnNwOyBFc3RhYmxpc2hpbmcgYSBCYXNlIFVSSSZxdW90OyB3b3VsZCBiZSBy ZWxldmFudCBoZXJlLCBhbmQgaXQncyByZWZlcnJlZCB0byBieSBKU09OIExEIHRvbzxvOnA+PC9v OnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0 cDovL3Rvb2xzLmlldGYub3JnL2h0bWwvcmZjMzk4NiNzZWN0aW9uLTUuMSI+aHR0cDovL3Rvb2xz LmlldGYub3JnL2h0bWwvcmZjMzk4NiNzZWN0aW9uLTUuMTwvYT48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwv ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0K PC9kaXY+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBzdHlsZT0iYm9yZGVyOm5vbmU7Ym9yZGVyLWxlZnQ6c29saWQg I0NDQ0NDQyAxLjBwdDtwYWRkaW5nOjBpbiAwaW4gMGluIDYuMHB0O21hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjQuOHB0 O21hcmdpbi10b3A6NS4wcHQ7bWFyZ2luLXJpZ2h0OjBpbjttYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tOjUuMHB0Ij4N CjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHA+Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8 cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj5Kb2huIEIuPG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+ DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHA+Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNz PSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPk9uIDIwMTMtMDctMjQsIGF0IDEyOjU4IFBNLCBNZWx2aW4gQ2FydmFsaG8g Jmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzptZWx2aW5jYXJ2YWxob0BnbWFpbC5jb20iIHRhcmdldD0iX2Js YW5rIj5tZWx2aW5jYXJ2YWxob0BnbWFpbC5jb208L2E+Jmd0OyB3cm90ZTo8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwv cD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206MTIu MHB0Ij48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cD4mbmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwv cD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cD4mbmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNv Tm9ybWFsIj5PbiAyMiBKdWx5IDIwMTMgMTY6MTAsIFBhdWwgRS4gSm9uZXMgJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9 Im1haWx0bzpwYXVsZWpAcGFja2V0aXplci5jb20iIHRhcmdldD0iX2JsYW5rIj5wYXVsZWpAcGFj a2V0aXplci5jb208L2E+Jmd0OyB3cm90ZTo8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFz cz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1i b3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG8iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5 OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdE Ij5NZWx2aW4sPC9zcGFuPjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5 bGU9Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tLWFsdDphdXRvIj48 c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1 b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+Jm5ic3A7PC9zcGFuPjxv OnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9w LWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tLWFsdDphdXRvIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1z aXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2Vy aWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+SXTigJlzIGVhc3kgZW5vdWdoIHRvIHJlcGxhY2Ugc3Ry aW5ncyBpbiBVUklzIHNob3VsZCBkYXRhIG5lZWQgdG8gYmUgcG9ydGVkLiZuYnNwOyBJIHN1Z2dl c3Qgd2UgcmVtb3ZlIHRoZQ0KIHdvcmQg4oCcYWJzb2x1dGXigJ0gd2hlcmUgd2UgY3VycmVudGx5 IGhhdmUg4oCcYWJzb2x1dGUgVVJJ4oCdIGFuZCB0aGVuIGludHJvZHVjZSBhIG5ldyBwYXJhZ3Jh cGggaW4gdGhlIHRlcm1pbm9sb2d5IHNlY3Rpb24gYXMgZm9sbG93czo8L3NwYW4+PG86cD48L286 cD48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1 dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG8iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEu MHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90 Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj4mbmJzcDs8L3NwYW4+PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0i TXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0 b20tYWx0OmF1dG87bWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6LjVpbiI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEx LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVv dDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+VGhlIHVzZSBvZiBVUklzIHRocm91Z2hvdXQgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVu dCByZWZlcnMgdG8gVVJJcyBmb2xsb3dpbmcgdGhlIHN5bnRheCBzcGVjaWZpZWQgaW4gU2VjdGlv biAzIG9mIFJGQyAzOTg2LiZuYnNwOyBSZWxhdGl2ZSBVUklzLCBoYXZpbmcgc3ludGF4IGZvbGxv d2luZyB0aGF0IG9mIFNlY3Rpb24gNC4yIG9yIFJGQw0KIDM5ODYsIGFyZSBub3QgdXNlZCB3aXRo IFdlYkZpbmdlci48L3NwYW4+PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBz dHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG8i PjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkm cXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj4mbmJzcDs8L3NwYW4+ PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10 b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG8iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1z ZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj5JcyB0aGF0IGNsZWFyPzwvc3Bhbj48bzpwPjwvbzpw PjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8 ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206MTIuMHB0Ij5I aSBQYXVsLCBjdXJyZW50bHkgJnF1b3Q7QWJzb2x1dGUgVVJJJnF1b3Q7IG9jY3VycyBvbmx5IGlu IHNlY3Rpb24gNC40IChpZSB0aGUgZGVzY3JpcHRpb24gb2YgSlJEKS4mbmJzcDsgQ2VydGFpbmx5 IEkgdGhpbmsgdGhlICdhYnNvbHV0ZScgc2hvdWxkIGJlIHJlbW92ZWQgaW4gc2VjdGlvbiA0LjQu Jm5ic3A7DQo8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3Jt YWwiPlRoZSBSRkMgaW4gZXNzZW5jZSBkZXNjcmliZXMgdHdvIHRoaW5ncywgPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0K MS4gdGhlIHdlYmZpbmdlciBwcm90b2NvbDxicj4NCjIuIHRoZSBKUkQgZGVmaW5pdGlvbjxicj4N Cjxicj4NClRoaXMgcmVzdHJpY3Rpb24gb24gcmVsYXRpdmUgVVJJcyBhcHBsaWVzIHRvICgyKSwg cmF0aGVyIHRoYW4sIHRoZSB3aG9sZSBkb2N1bWVudCwgYnV0IGFzIGl0IGhhcHBlbnMgdGhhdCB0 dXJucyBvdXQgdG8gYmUgdGhlIHNhbWUgdGhpbmc8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpTaWRlIG5vdGU6IGluIG90 aGVyIHNpdHVhdGlvbnMgSSBsaWtlIHJlbGF0aXZlIFVSSXMgYmVjYXVzZSB0aGV5IGNhbiBiZSBt b3ZlZCBmcm9tIG9uZSBsb2NhdGlvbiB0byBhbm90aGVyIGluIGEgbm9uLWJyZWFraW5nIHdheS4m bmJzcDsgU2F5IEkgaGF2ZSAvYWJvdXQvIC9waG90b3MvIC9ibG9nLyBhdCBvbmUgbG9jYXRpb24s IEkgY2FuIG1vdmUgdGhlbSB0byBhbm90aGVyIHdpdGhvdXQgaGF2aW5nIHRvIHdvcnJ5IHRvbyBt dWNoLiZuYnNwOyBUaGVyZWZvcmUsIGlmDQogSlJEIHdhcyBldmVyIHVzZWQgaW4gYSBjb250ZXh0 IG91dHNpZGUgb2Ygd2ViZmluZ2VyLCB0aGF0IHdvdWxkIGJlIGEgc2xpZ2h0IGFkdmFudGFnZS48 bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPiZuYnNw OzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBzdHlsZT0iYm9yZGVyOm5vbmU7 Ym9yZGVyLWxlZnQ6c29saWQgI0NDQ0NDQyAxLjBwdDtwYWRkaW5nOjBpbiAwaW4gMGluIDYuMHB0 O21hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjQuOHB0O21hcmdpbi10b3A6NS4wcHQ7bWFyZ2luLXJpZ2h0OjBpbjttYXJn aW4tYm90dG9tOjUuMHB0Ij4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNv LW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG8iPjxzcGFuIHN0 eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1 b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj4mbmJzcDs8L3NwYW4+PG86cD48L286 cD48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1 dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG8iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEu MHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90 Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj5QYXVsPC9zcGFuPjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1z b05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9t LWFsdDphdXRvIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVv dDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+Jm5i c3A7PC9zcGFuPjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iYm9yZGVyOm5vbmU7Ym9yZGVy LWxlZnQ6c29saWQgd2luZG93dGV4dCAxLjVwdDtwYWRkaW5nOjBpbiAwaW4gMGluIDQuMHB0O2Jv cmRlci1jb2xvcjotbW96LXVzZS10ZXh0LWNvbG9yIC1tb3otdXNlLXRleHQtY29sb3IgLW1vei11 c2UtdGV4dC1jb2xvciBibHVlIj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJib3JkZXI6bm9uZTtib3Jk ZXItdG9wOnNvbGlkIHdpbmRvd3RleHQgMS4wcHQ7cGFkZGluZzozLjBwdCAwaW4gMGluIDBpbjti b3JkZXItY29sb3I6LW1vei11c2UtdGV4dC1jb2xvciAtbW96LXVzZS10ZXh0LWNvbG9yIj4NCjxw IGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtc28tbWFyZ2luLXRvcC1hbHQ6YXV0bzttc28tbWFy Z2luLWJvdHRvbS1hbHQ6YXV0byI+PGI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC4wcHQ7Zm9u dC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7VGFob21hJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDsiPkZyb206 PC9zcGFuPjwvYj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVv dDtUYWhvbWEmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90OyI+IE1lbHZpbiBDYXJ2YWxobyBb bWFpbHRvOjxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzptZWx2aW5jYXJ2YWxob0BnbWFpbC5jb20iIHRhcmdldD0i X2JsYW5rIj5tZWx2aW5jYXJ2YWxob0BnbWFpbC5jb208L2E+XQ0KPGJyPg0KPGI+U2VudDo8L2I+ IE1vbmRheSwgSnVseSAyMiwgMjAxMyA0OjA5IEFNPGJyPg0KPGI+VG86PC9iPiBQYXVsIEUuIEpv bmVzPGJyPg0KPGI+Q2M6PC9iPiB3ZWJmaW5nZXI8L3NwYW4+PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8ZGl2 Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PGJyPg0KPGI+U3ViamVjdDo8L2I+IFJlOiBbd2ViZmlu Z2VyXSBBYnNvbHV0ZSBVUkkgdnMgVVJJPG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8 cD4mbmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8 cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1h cmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG8iPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNs YXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtc28tbWFyZ2luLXRvcC1hbHQ6YXV0bzttc28tbWFyZ2lu LWJvdHRvbS1hbHQ6YXV0byI+Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9 Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206 MTIuMHB0Ij4mbmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFs IiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1 dG8iPk9uIDIyIEp1bHkgMjAxMyAwOTowNiwgUGF1bCBFLiBKb25lcyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFp bHRvOnBhdWxlakBwYWNrZXRpemVyLmNvbSIgdGFyZ2V0PSJfYmxhbmsiPnBhdWxlakBwYWNrZXRp emVyLmNvbTwvYT4mZ3Q7IHdyb3RlOjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwPkluIG5vdCBz dWdnZXN0aW5nIHdlIHVzZSBvciBhbGxvdyByZWxhdGl2ZSBVUklzLiBUaGUgaW1tZWRpYXRlIHF1 ZXN0aW9uIHdvdWxkIGJlICZxdW90O3JlbGF0aXZlIHRvIHdoYXQmcXVvdDsuIEkgdGhpbmsgdGhl IFVSSXMgc2hvdWxkIGJlIGFic29sdXRlLCBidXQgbm90IGZvbGxvd2luZyB0aGUgc3ludGF4IG9m ICZxdW90O2Fic29sdXRlLVVSSSZxdW90OywgYnV0IGluc3RlYWQganVzdCBmb2xsb3dpbmcgJnF1 b3Q7VVJJJnF1b3Q7LjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1z b05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9t LWFsdDphdXRvIj5ZZXMsIHRoYXQncyBhIGdvb2QgcXVlc3Rpb24uJm5ic3A7IEdlbmVyYWxseSBy ZWxhdGl2ZSBVUklzIGFyZSByZWxhdGl2ZSB0byB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQsIGJ1dCB0aGV5IG5lZWQg bm90IGJlLiZuYnNwOyBGb3IgZXhhbXBsZSB0aGV5IGNvdWxkIGJlIHJlbGF0aXZlIGJ5IGRlZmF1 bHQgdG8gdGhlIFtzdXBwb3NlZF0gd2ViZmluZ2VyDQogcmVnaXN0cnkuJm5ic3A7IEluIEpTT04g TEQgdGhleSBoYXZlIGEgQGNvbnRleHQgdmFyaWFibGUgd2hpY2ggYWxsb3dzIHF1aXRlIGEgYml0 IG9mIGZsZXhpYmlsaXR5IGluIHRoaXMgcmVnYXJkLiZuYnNwOyBJJ20gdW5zdXJlIGlmIHJlbGF0 aXZlIFVSSXMgYXJlIGNvbnNpZGVyZWQgYSBtdXN0IGluIHN0YW5kYXJkcyBiYXNlZCBzZXJpYWxp emF0aW9uIChJIHN1c3BlY3Qgbm90KSBidXQgdGhleSBoYXZlIHRoZSBhZHZhbnRhZ2Ugb2Ygc2xp Z2h0bHkgaW5jcmVhc2VkDQogZGF0YSBwb3J0YWJpbGl0eS48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2 Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtc28tbWFyZ2luLXRvcC1hbHQ6 YXV0bzttc28tbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbS1hbHQ6YXV0byI+Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8 L2Rpdj4NCjxibG9ja3F1b3RlIHN0eWxlPSJib3JkZXI6bm9uZTtib3JkZXItbGVmdDpzb2xpZCB3 aW5kb3d0ZXh0IDEuMHB0O3BhZGRpbmc6MGluIDBpbiAwaW4gNi4wcHQ7bWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6NC44 cHQ7bWFyZ2luLXRvcDo1LjBwdDttYXJnaW4tcmlnaHQ6MGluO21hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206NS4wcHQ7 Ym9yZGVyLWNvbG9yOi1tb3otdXNlLXRleHQtY29sb3IgLW1vei11c2UtdGV4dC1jb2xvciAtbW96 LXVzZS10ZXh0LWNvbG9yIHJnYigyMDQsMjA0LDIwNCkiPg0KPHA+UGF1bDxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9w Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21h cmdpbi1ib3R0b206MTIuMHB0Ij4mbmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNs YXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIGFsaWduPSJjZW50ZXIiIHN0eWxlPSJ0ZXh0LWFsaWduOmNlbnRlciI+ PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7VGFob21hJnF1 b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDsiPg0KPGhyIHNpemU9IjIiIHdpZHRoPSIxMDAlIiBh bGlnbj0iY2VudGVyIj4NCjwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxl PSJtc28tbWFyZ2luLXRvcC1hbHQ6YXV0bzttc28tbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbS1hbHQ6YXV0byI+PGI+ PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7VGFob21hJnF1 b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDsiPkZyb206PC9zcGFuPjwvYj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0i Zm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtUYWhvbWEmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fu cy1zZXJpZiZxdW90OyI+IE1lbHZpbiBDYXJ2YWxobyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOm1lbHZp bmNhcnZhbGhvQGdtYWlsLmNvbSIgdGFyZ2V0PSJfYmxhbmsiPm1lbHZpbmNhcnZhbGhvQGdtYWls LmNvbTwvYT4mZ3Q7PGJyPg0KPGI+U2VudDo8L2I+IE1vbiBKdWwgMjIgMDI6NDY6MjUgRURUIDIw MTM8L3NwYW4+PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5 bGU9Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tLWFsdDphdXRvIj48 c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtUYWhvbWEmcXVv dDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90OyI+PGJyPg0KPGI+VG86PC9iPiAmcXVvdDtQYXVsIEUu IEpvbmVzJnF1b3Q7ICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86cGF1bGVqQHBhY2tldGl6ZXIuY29tIiB0 YXJnZXQ9Il9ibGFuayI+cGF1bGVqQHBhY2tldGl6ZXIuY29tPC9hPiZndDs8L3NwYW4+PG86cD48 L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtc28tbWFyZ2lu LXRvcC1hbHQ6YXV0bzttc28tbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbS1hbHQ6YXV0byI+PGI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7VGFob21hJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3Nh bnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDsiPkNjOjwvc3Bhbj48L2I+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC4w cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7VGFob21hJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDsi PiB3ZWJmaW5nZXIgJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzp3ZWJmaW5nZXJAaWV0Zi5vcmciIHRhcmdl dD0iX2JsYW5rIj53ZWJmaW5nZXJAaWV0Zi5vcmc8L2E+Jmd0Ozwvc3Bhbj48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwv cD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0 OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG8iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6 MTAuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O1RhaG9tYSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1 b3Q7Ij48YnI+DQo8Yj5TdWJqZWN0OjwvYj4gUmU6IFt3ZWJmaW5nZXJdIEFic29sdXRlIFVSSSB2 cyBVUkk8L3NwYW4+PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1z b05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9t LWFsdDphdXRvIj4mbmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9y bWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0 OmF1dG8iPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwi IHN0eWxlPSJtc28tbWFyZ2luLXRvcC1hbHQ6YXV0bzttc28tbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbS1hbHQ6YXV0 byI+Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5 bGU9Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tLWFsdDphdXRvIj4m bmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0i bXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG8iPk9uIDIy IEp1bHkgMjAxMyAwNzo0NywgUGF1bCBFLiBKb25lcyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOnBhdWxl akBwYWNrZXRpemVyLmNvbSIgdGFyZ2V0PSJfYmxhbmsiPnBhdWxlakBwYWNrZXRpemVyLmNvbTwv YT4mZ3Q7IHdyb3RlOjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9 Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tLWFsdDphdXRvIj5Gb2xr cyw8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpPbmUgb2YgdGhlIHJlcXVpcmVtZW50cyBpbiB0aGUgSlJEIHNwZWMgaXMg dGhhdCBjZXJ0YWluIFVSSXMgKGUuZy4sIHRob3NlPGJyPg0KaWRlbnRpZnlpbmcgbGluayByZWxh dGlvbiB0eXBlcyBhbmQgcHJvcGVydGllcykgYmUgJnF1b3Q7YWJzb2x1dGUgVVJJcyZxdW90Oy4g Jm5ic3A7VGhpczxicj4NCnRlcm0gaGFzIGJlZW4gYSBwb2ludCBvZiBjb25mdXNpb24sIHNpbmNl IFJGQyAzOTg2IHVzZXMgdGhlIHRlcm0gdG8gaGF2ZSBhPGJyPg0KY29uY3JldGUgbWVhbmluZywg bmFtZWx5IHRoaXM6PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDthYnNvbHV0ZS1VUkkg Jm5ic3A7PSBzY2hlbWUgJnF1b3Q7OiZxdW90OyBoaWVyLXBhcnQgWyAmcXVvdDs/JnF1b3Q7IHF1 ZXJ5IF08YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpBbmQgdGhlIHRlcm0gaXMgdXNlZCwgYmVjYXVzZSB0aGF0J3MgdGhl IHRlcm0gdXNlZCBpbiB0aGUgT0FTSVMgWFJEPGJyPg0Kc3BlY2lmaWNhdGlvbi4gJm5ic3A7SG93 ZXZlciwgaXQgd2FzIG5vdCBjbGVhciB0byBtZSB3aGV0aGVyIHRoYXQgcmVmZXJyZWQgdG8gdGhl PGJyPg0KYWJvdmUgKHdoaWNoIEkgYXNzdW1lZCkgb3IgcmVmZXJyZWQgdG8gVVJJcyB0aGF0IGFy ZSBub3QgcmVsYXRpdmUgVVJJczxicj4NCihpLmUuLCB0aG9zZSBsYWNraW5nIGEgc2NoZW1lIHNw ZWNpZmllZCkuPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KSSBoYWQgYW4gZXhjaGFuZ2Ugd2l0aCBFcmFuIEhhbW1lciBh bmQgTWFyayBOb3R0aW5naGFtLiAmbmJzcDtJIGJlbGlldmUgdGhlPGJyPg0KaW50ZW50IG9mIHRo YXQgbGFuZ3VhZ2Ugd2FzIG5vdCB0byByZXF1aXJlIHRoZSBhYm92ZSBjb25zdHJhaW5lZCBzeW50 YXgsPGJyPg0KYnV0IHRvIHJlcXVpcmUgdGhlIHN0YW5kYXJkIFVSSSBzeW50YXg6PGJyPg0KPGJy Pg0KJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDtVUkkgPSBzY2hlbWUgJnF1b3Q7OiZxdW90OyBoaWVyLXBh cnQgWyAmcXVvdDs/JnF1b3Q7IHF1ZXJ5IF0gWyAmcXVvdDsjJnF1b3Q7IGZyYWdtZW50IF08bzpw PjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdp bi10b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG8iPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9v OnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1zby1t YXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tLWFsdDphdXRvIj5UaGVyZSBhcmUg bWFueSB3YXlzIHRoYXQgcGVvcGxlIGRvIHRoaXMsIHNlZTo8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8YSBocmVmPSJo dHRwOi8vdGFudGVrLmNvbS8yMDExLzIzOC9iMS9tYW55LXdheXMtc2xpY2UtdXJsLW5hbWUtcGll Y2VzIiB0YXJnZXQ9Il9ibGFuayI+aHR0cDovL3RhbnRlay5jb20vMjAxMS8yMzgvYjEvbWFueS13 YXlzLXNsaWNlLXVybC1uYW1lLXBpZWNlczwvYT48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp dj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtc28tbWFyZ2luLXRvcC1hbHQ6YXV0bztt c28tbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbS1hbHQ6YXV0byI+Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4N CjxibG9ja3F1b3RlIHN0eWxlPSJib3JkZXI6bm9uZTtib3JkZXItbGVmdDpzb2xpZCB3aW5kb3d0 ZXh0IDEuMHB0O3BhZGRpbmc6MGluIDBpbiAwaW4gNi4wcHQ7bWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6NC44cHQ7bWFy Z2luLXRvcDo1LjBwdDttYXJnaW4tcmlnaHQ6MGluO21hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206NS4wcHQ7Ym9yZGVy LWNvbG9yOi1tb3otdXNlLXRleHQtY29sb3IgLW1vei11c2UtdGV4dC1jb2xvciAtbW96LXVzZS10 ZXh0LWNvbG9yIHJnYigyMDQsMjA0LDIwNCkiPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9 Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tLWFsdDphdXRvIj48YnI+ DQpHaXZlbiB0aGF0IHVuZGVyc3RhbmRpbmcsIEkgYmVsaWV2ZSB3ZSBzaG91bGQgcmVtb3ZlIHRo ZSB3b3JkICZxdW90O2Fic29sdXRlJnF1b3Q7PGJyPg0KdGhhdCBhcHBlYXJzIGluIGZyb250IG9m ICZxdW90O1VSSSZxdW90OyBpbiB0aGUgV2ViRmluZ2VyIHNwZWMuICZuYnNwO0RvIG90aGVycyBo YXZlIGFuPGJyPg0Kb3BpbmlvbiBvbiB0aGlzPzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9ibG9ja3F1b3Rl Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtc28tbWFyZ2luLXRvcC1hbHQ6 YXV0bzttc28tbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbS1hbHQ6YXV0byI+Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8 L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3At YWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG8iPiYjNDM7MSBvbiBhbGxvd2luZyBy ZWxhdGl2ZSBVUklzPG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNv Tm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLW1hcmdpbi10b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87bXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20t YWx0OmF1dG8iPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBzdHls ZT0iYm9yZGVyOm5vbmU7Ym9yZGVyLWxlZnQ6c29saWQgd2luZG93dGV4dCAxLjBwdDtwYWRkaW5n OjBpbiAwaW4gMGluIDYuMHB0O21hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjQuOHB0O21hcmdpbi10b3A6NS4wcHQ7bWFy Z2luLXJpZ2h0OjBpbjttYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tOjUuMHB0O2JvcmRlci1jb2xvcjotbW96LXVzZS10 ZXh0LWNvbG9yIC1tb3otdXNlLXRleHQtY29sb3IgLW1vei11c2UtdGV4dC1jb2xvciByZ2IoMjA0 LDIwNCwyMDQpIj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtc28tbWFyZ2luLXRvcC1h bHQ6YXV0bzttc28tbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbS1hbHQ6YXV0byI+PGJyPg0KUGF1bDxicj4NCjxicj4N Cjxicj4NCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fPGJy Pg0Kd2ViZmluZ2VyIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdDxicj4NCjxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzp3ZWJmaW5nZXJA aWV0Zi5vcmciIHRhcmdldD0iX2JsYW5rIj53ZWJmaW5nZXJAaWV0Zi5vcmc8L2E+PGJyPg0KPGEg aHJlZj0iaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby93ZWJmaW5nZXIiIHRh cmdldD0iX2JsYW5rIj5odHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3dlYmZp bmdlcjwvYT48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9 Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90 dG9tLWFsdDphdXRvIj4mbmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1z by1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvO21zby1tYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tLWFsdDphdXRvIj4mbmJzcDs8 bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8 L2Jsb2NrcXVvdGU+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxwPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8 L2Rpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fPGJyPg0Kd2ViZmluZ2VyIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdDxicj4NCjxhIGhy ZWY9Im1haWx0bzp3ZWJmaW5nZXJAaWV0Zi5vcmciIHRhcmdldD0iX2JsYW5rIj53ZWJmaW5nZXJA aWV0Zi5vcmc8L2E+PGJyPg0KPGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9s aXN0aW5mby93ZWJmaW5nZXIiIHRhcmdldD0iX2JsYW5rIj5odHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9t YWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3dlYmZpbmdlcjwvYT48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHA+ Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Jsb2NrcXVv dGU+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxwPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwv ZGl2Pg0KPHA+Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8 L2JvZHk+DQo8L2h0bWw+DQo= --_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B70D9F9TK5EX14MBXC284r_-- From melvincarvalho@gmail.com Sun Jul 28 15:58:32 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C251121F942D for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 15:58:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xBU8Zjy2pg5D for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 15:58:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x22f.google.com (mail-la0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DA2121F9339 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 15:58:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f47.google.com with SMTP id eo20so1920805lab.6 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 15:58:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=BegDm7g7fUDAIe/IVvnegOKZbtIwc7MxIdsIvL/PMG8=; b=gaBwLcNj+JELtjvFk8Fkc5mU7NkFFPRmgD+jK/1SVkc5557aUAFSg29xmRzklBUE2w fu3A/zr+QPK7+6o1WXiGFsqBfzhKMr9Bv+4qqfe5BLDVgbcVmOgbVWDfLdBgKameLO5K iY2sRD+xun8ozWynrfThaUremKK8YL63CQ0FGJWLxy247IPWYL9KGROxHHv7i76c/BpR irQFgrcaLbXdStXrG+bssvyH9kXRKM8zjw/GN9gtx5gSksmTqMDCwlfSbNYmkOBXy9vL iz5GRUZ/JVwoTQG3nN0ihnkZhDQH979BiWxDgMEx2Atf5A1z7kgX4fvzByBiuBOQsTJ1 HSGg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.73.33 with SMTP id i1mr9262208lbv.24.1375052303083; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 15:58:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.59.193 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 15:58:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51EEE28E.7080604@gluu.org> References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51EEDE9C.8020105@gluu.org> <05cb01ce87de$62c09200$2841b600$@packetizer.com> <51EEE28E.7080604@gluu.org> Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 00:58:22 +0200 Message-ID: From: Melvin Carvalho To: Javier Rojas Blum Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c33c0212b17804e29a502c Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , Edmund Jay , Tim Bray , openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com, webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 22:58:32 -0000 --001a11c33c0212b17804e29a502c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 23 July 2013 22:07, Javier Rojas Blum wrote: > Please try this: > https://seed.gluu.org/.well-known/webfinger?resource=3Dacct:javier@seed.g= luu.org&rel=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fconnect%2F1.0%2Fissuer > I'm seeing a lot of global keys ("rel" parameters) that are not in the official registry: http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml e.g. evan's "favourites" "lists", nick's "auth-endpoint", paul's "test" and quite a few more -- it seems something of a free for all, how are clients supposed to interpret these? some of these links do not resolve anywhere such as : http://schemas.google.com/g/2010%23updates-from others such as "http://packetizer.com/rel/blog" seem to be creating existing concepts -- would it not be better to reuse things long standing dictionaries such foaf, schema.org, sioc, open graph protocol etc. > > Regards > > -- Javier > > > > On 07/23/2013 03:54 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: > > I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be empty.**= * > * > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] > *On Behalf Of *Javier Rojas Blum > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:51 PM > *To:* Edmund Jay > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim > Bray; Paul E. Jones > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > ** ** > > acct:javier@seed.gluu.org > acct:mike@seed.gluu.org > > -- Javier > > > On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay wrote:**** > > The following can be used : **** > > **** > > alice@connect.openid4.us or**** > > bob@connect.openid4.us**** > > ** ** > > -- Edmund**** > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Mike Jones > *To:* "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" > ; > Tim Bray ; Paul E. Jones > > *Cc:* "webfinger@ietf.org" > *Sent:* Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM > *Subject:* RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > ** ** > > Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post > specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for > testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger?**** > > **** > > Thanks all,**= * > * > > -- Mike**** > > **** > > *From:* openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [ > mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] > *On Behalf Of *Mike Jones > *Sent:* Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM > *To:* Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com > *Subject:* RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > **** > > See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID > providers, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger.**** > > **** > > -- Mike**** > > **** > > *From:* webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] > *On Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM > *To:* Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > **** > > Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=3D > http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer**** > > **** > > On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones > wrote:**** > > Tim,**** > > **** > > You=92re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: = *** > * > > **** > > Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it > should be properly formatted.**** > > **** > > I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: > reply. I=92m happy to throw something in if you want to check a particul= ar > response.**** > > **** > > Paul**** > > **** > > *From:* webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] *O= n > Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM > *To:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > **** > > Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains t= o > test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T**** > > **** > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "OpenID Connect Interop" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > **** > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "OpenID Connect Interop" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > **** > > ** ** > > > > > **** > > _______________________________________________**** > > webfinger mailing list**** > > webfinger@ietf.org**** > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger**** > > ** ** > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing listwebfinger@ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/list= info/webfinger > > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > > --001a11c33c0212b17804e29a502c Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On 23 July 2013 22:07, Javier Rojas Blum <javier@gluu.org> wrote:
=20 =20 =20

I'm seeing a lot of global= keys ("rel" parameters) that are not in the official registry:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xh= tml

e.g. evan's "favourites" "lists", ni= ck's "auth-endpoint", paul's "test" and quite a= few more -- it seems something of a free for all, how are clients supposed= to interpret these?

some of these links do not resolve anywhere such as : http://schemas.google= .com/g/2010%23updates-from

others such as "http://packetizer.com/rel/blog&qu= ot; seem to be creating existing concepts -- would it not be better to reus= e things long standing dictionaries such foaf, schema.org, sioc, open graph protocol etc.
=A0

Regards

-- Javier



On 07/23/2013 03:54 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote:
=20 =20 =20 =20

I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be empty.

=A0

=A0

From:<= span style=3D"font-size:10pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-seri= f";color:windowtext"> webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:51 PM
To: Edmund Jay
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

=A0

acct:javier@seed.gluu.org
= acct:mike@seed.gluu.org

-- Javier


On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay wrote:

The following can be used :=A0

=A0

=A0

-- Edmund

=A0

Coul= d those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger?<= /u>

=A0<= /span>

=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Thanks all,

=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 -- Mike

=A0<= /span>

From: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-interop@google= groups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM
To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.c= om
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

=A0

See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:O= C5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger.

=A0<= /span>

=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 -- Mike

=A0<= /span>

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

=A0

Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=3Dhttp://openid.net/spe= cs/connect/1.0/issuer

=A0

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Tim,

=A0

You=92re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp:

=A0

Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly formatted.

=A0

I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.=A0 I=92m happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular response.

=A0

Paul

=A0

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

=A0

Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling.=A0 Suggestions? -T

=A0

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscr= ibe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com= /groups/opt_out.
=A0
=A0

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connec= t Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/group= s/opt_out.
=A0
=A0

=A0




_______________________________________________<=
/u>
webfinger mailing list
we=
bfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger<=
/u>

=A0



_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<=
/a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


--001a11c33c0212b17804e29a502c-- From nick@silverbucket.net Sun Jul 28 16:13:34 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 665A021F9C53 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:13:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ti+My3GiGvKk for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-f171.google.com (mail-lb0-f171.google.com [209.85.217.171]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9055B21F93E4 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:13:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f171.google.com with SMTP id t13so578960lbd.16 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:13:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=yV2hLfA7Sa0GHCD7QXI1gireQTUi+F9v2ofAzzW/JPA=; b=FRBWogWu+j3xula84uWwAGGKtVlfTkp+vHulIoCAQAi0Na81tIFml5bM2iUKKQFXuv zCpExActoTGHUMlw4XKWsJoeDxPPjSXr19NTJhT3Notnh6TN8M+ZvTg/4jmqGptgyfwi fjdfTsdi0AG9lN5GZuUJQS7PKDjuSROJY6k1gTJRB/P+tp0V089Mzdf5sTRriX2an9Ku PioqE+mEVg1q9dHn2lJzDnQ6EDE7rM3My4hqQp4jMIvtyhhCAqmCLStAnYChuUZnSIMX uY1xTfFaG9WkOEG07m1awlnEtfFIYWxG/b7+c1dBWMeuOYokjGelQnJOdWPjcT07ECtX XI6Q== X-Received: by 10.112.180.164 with SMTP id dp4mr24829528lbc.68.1375053208312; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:13:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x22d.google.com (mail-la0-x22d.google.com [2a00:1450:4010:c03::22d]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id f7sm5061167lbq.8.2013.07.28.16.13.27 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:13:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f45.google.com with SMTP id fj20so630419lab.32 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:13:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.152.21.131 with SMTP id v3mr25866293lae.50.1375053207091; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:13:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.73.239 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:12:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> From: Nick Jennings Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 01:12:57 +0200 Message-ID: To: Tim Bray Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0158b694f4c24d04e29a8503 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlhUTv5wc1svx6t8VnIdd6QiEo8OQKpx5HXOpKygHxV/zBx/Utew0TwdugGhtnECe4HOEPh Cc: "Paul E. Jones" , "webfinger@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 23:13:34 -0000 --089e0158b694f4c24d04e29a8503 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Nick Jennings wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 6:37 AM, Tim Bray wrote: > >> 538> curl ' >> http://silverbucket.net/.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:nick@silverbucket.net >> ' >> curl: (7) couldn't connect to host >> > > Hi Tim, thanks for the heads up. I'm running the dev branch of haproxy and > it's not quite stable yet :) restarted, should all work now. > > Oh, and that should be 'https' --089e0158b694f4c24d04e29a8503 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Nick Jennings &l= t;nick@silverbuc= ket.net> wrote:

On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 6:= 37 AM, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote:

Hi Tim, thanks for the heads up. I'm running the dev branch= of haproxy and it's not quite stable yet :) restarted, should all work= now.


Oh, and that should be 'https'

=
--089e0158b694f4c24d04e29a8503-- From melvincarvalho@gmail.com Sun Jul 28 16:55:52 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69DBF21F93F3 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:55:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_42=0.6, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y0LZa2f1D7sB for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:55:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x236.google.com (mail-lb0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6397721F8EC3 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:55:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f182.google.com with SMTP id v20so3242425lbc.27 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:55:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Ys2EbkyVvYlYdyn7bAhnCDTJoEygw7kzhj/JlFC+Ahk=; b=j6tbwYCuLIO4v5pv71unII/9N+0HF551E/xIH2YPzk6LGnsdbVtk5gZ43Pb63steMw MnMoGaDCL0eDZuieLojAJ2zPcj5QVoX29x2hh4KhRlhUvgcP/+/lhQFzi4ef2eoBWy7w 77h3jGdXAZZ9LqIc83prjVFjhL8AO/C2kRdk7y6pWuqL8Rh+cMn5uaKOB7PXHWHd5Dpx 1gVKKrOBl3/A3HkT5GUvbMZce7bdN9ByDay5je7qXov/niTYFM828n+cq8QSg+l0ulUU iLl6+06ElSdy7RFkxl98bKrycb8wEwsqrCFiGhkZqHvyUwgIgPJYYmzs2KZHXXkSJtGk KUmQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.200.37 with SMTP id jp5mr531395lbc.61.1375055750294; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:55:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.59.193 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:55:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51E79410.9070604@e14n.com> References: <51E79410.9070604@e14n.com> Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 01:55:50 +0200 Message-ID: From: Melvin Carvalho To: Evan Prodromou Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c36b6a8af22904e29b1da3 Cc: webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 23:55:52 -0000 --001a11c36b6a8af22904e29b1da3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 18 July 2013 09:06, Evan Prodromou wrote: > On 13-07-14 05:53 PM, Tim Bray wrote: > > Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to > test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T > > All pump.io accounts have Webfingers. > > https://identi.ca/.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:tbray@identi.ca > There's a slight naming clash with "follows". Of course in the social web we naturally think of twitter followers, but I've seen this used in some instances for things like 'Thursday' follows 'Wednesday' etc. > > -Evan > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger > > --001a11c36b6a8af22904e29b1da3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On 18 July 2013 09:06, Evan Prodromou <evan@e14n.com> wr= ote:
=20 =20 =20
On 13-07-14 05:53 PM, Tim Bray wrote:
Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling.=A0 Suggestions? -T
All pump.io accounts h= ave Webfingers.

=A0=A0=A0 =20 https://identi.ca/.well-known/webfinger?reso= urce=3Dacct:tbray@identi.ca

There's a slight n= aming clash with "follows".=A0 Of course in the social web we nat= urally think of twitter followers, but I've seen this used in some inst= ances for things like 'Thursday' follows 'Wednesday' etc.
=A0

-Evan


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


--001a11c36b6a8af22904e29b1da3-- From paulej@packetizer.com Sun Jul 28 20:55:45 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 883E321F9F12 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 20:55:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.305 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.305 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.159, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTP_ESCAPED_HOST=0.134] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ys80iWlegoUW for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 20:55:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dublin.packetizer.com (dublin.packetizer.com [75.101.130.125]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 879BA21F9E51 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 20:55:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sydney (rrcs-98-101-148-48.midsouth.biz.rr.com [98.101.148.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6T3tMwM014998 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 28 Jul 2013 23:55:23 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1375070125; bh=vXeD1oiVFu2dJwpmkT3wlKxiKwO7tGtVkCwM1oMPDhc=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=EX8bzAiJKfcLUwtFAbzZ9TEGa2PsOCCaZbVoKSzkPOMD88yRSP0oqXezCZgksBFn7 /luiAn5y5dXzuBFjd3TBFrqvUrKj7ZBvK1Egq8nx0r4CrJUGpRW7KCFSrftbfrH0kt grChiGxFzOvNR2GqQxt/ISD91WfdZsPHsdSGbXaA= From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Melvin Carvalho'" , "'Javier Rojas Blum'" References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51EEDE9C.8020105@gluu.org> <05cb01ce87de$62c09200$2841b600$@packetizer.com> <51EEE28E.7080604@gluu.org> In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 23:55:24 -0400 Message-ID: <016101ce8c0f$759aa430$60cfec90$@packetizer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0162_01CE8BED.EE8B9C40" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQL/r+No/hn+Dxq4/2ORfMNzEE5vjgGfjNBBAk5SfHcBYrYgdgKGwE2GAVKR0D8CoDoGBQEixDXtAtnNNrsBNNtgdJaQ4bmA Content-Language: en-us Cc: 'webfinger' , 'Edmund Jay' , 'Tim Bray' , openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 03:55:45 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0162_01CE8BED.EE8B9C40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Melvin, Ideally, new values would be registered with IANA. That ought to come in the form of an RFC to fully explain their purpose so that there is no misunderstanding as to the intent of any particular "rel" value. The "blog" one I assigned under the packetizer.com domain was done since there wasn't one (AFAIK) that meant precisely the same thing. I expect some non-registered values will conflict with other non-registered values. That's OK. People build products and need an identifier. We see this with every protocol. Once there is a certain amount of momentum for it and/or people feel a "rel" ought to be registered because it has wide applicability, then definitely register a value. Paul From: Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2013 6:58 PM To: Javier Rojas Blum Cc: Paul E. Jones; webfinger; Tim Bray; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Edmund Jay Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs On 23 July 2013 22:07, Javier Rojas Blum wrote: Please try this: https://seed.gluu.org/.well-known/webfinger?resource=acct:javier@seed.gluu.o rg &rel=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fconnect%2F1.0%2Fissuer I'm seeing a lot of global keys ("rel" parameters) that are not in the official registry: http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml e.g. evan's "favourites" "lists", nick's "auth-endpoint", paul's "test" and quite a few more -- it seems something of a free for all, how are clients supposed to interpret these? some of these links do not resolve anywhere such as : http://schemas.google.com/g/2010%23updates-from others such as "http://packetizer.com/rel/blog" seem to be creating existing concepts -- would it not be better to reuse things long standing dictionaries such foaf, schema.org, sioc, open graph protocol etc. Regards -- Javier On 07/23/2013 03:54 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be empty. From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:51 PM To: Edmund Jay Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs acct:javier@seed.gluu.org acct:mike@seed.gluu.org -- Javier On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay wrote: The following can be used : alice@connect.openid4.us or bob@connect.openid4.us -- Edmund _____ From: Mike Jones To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" ; Tim Bray ; Paul E. Jones Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger? Thanks all, -- Mike From: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Jones Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger. -- Mike From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM To: Paul E. Jones Cc: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: Tim, You're welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly formatted. I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply. I'm happy to throw something in if you want to check a particular response. Paul From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Bray Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM To: webfinger@ietf.org Subject: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger _______________________________________________ webfinger mailing list webfinger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger ------=_NextPart_000_0162_01CE8BED.EE8B9C40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Melvin,

 

Ideally, new values would be registered with IANA.  That ought = to come in the form of an RFC to fully explain their purpose so that = there is no misunderstanding as to the intent of any particular = “rel” value.

 

The “blog” one I assigned under the packetizer.com domain = was done since there wasn’t one (AFAIK) that meant precisely the = same thing.  I expect some non-registered values will conflict with = other non-registered values.  That’s OK.  People build = products and need an identifier.  We see this with every = protocol.  Once there is a certain amount of momentum for it and/or = people feel a “rel” ought to be registered because it has = wide applicability, then definitely register a = value.

 

Paul

 

From:= = Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com]
Sent: = Sunday, July 28, 2013 6:58 PM
To: Javier Rojas = Blum
Cc: Paul E. Jones; webfinger; Tim Bray; = openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Edmund Jay
Subject: = Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

 

 

On 23 July 2013 22:07, Javier Rojas Blum <javier@gluu.org> = wrote:

 

I'm seeing a lot of global keys = ("rel" parameters) that are not in the official = registry:

http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml

 


Regards

-- = Javier




On 07/23/2013 03:54 PM, Paul E. Jones = wrote:

I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be = empty.

 

 

From:= = webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Javier Rojas Blum
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:51 = PM
To: Edmund Jay
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; = Paul E. Jones
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for = JRDs

 <= /o:p>

acct:javier@seed.gluu.org
acct:mike@seed.gluu.org

-- = Javier


On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay = wrote:

The = following can be used : 

 

<= div>

 

-- = Edmund

From:<= /b> = Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
To: = "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com"= <openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com>; = Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>; Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: "webfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org>
Sent: = Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM
Subject: RE: [webfinger] = Looking for JRDs

 

Could those of = you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post specific = identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for testing = e-mail based discovery using = WebFinger?

 

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       Thanks = all,

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       -- = Mike

 

From: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] = On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 = 4:34 PM
To: Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com
Subje= ct: RE: [webfinger] Looking for = JRDs

 

See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for = a list of OpenID providers, most of which implement Discovery, including = WebFinger.

 

     &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;            = ;            =       -- = Mike

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM
To: = Paul E. Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: Re: = [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

 

Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=3Dhttp://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer

 

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> = wrote:

Tim,

=

 

You’re = welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: =

 

Most of what = is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be = properly formatted.

 

I have = aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: = reply.  I’m happy to throw something in if you want to check = a particular response.

 

Paul

=

 

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tim Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: = webfinger@ietf.org
Subject: [webfinger] = Looking for JRDs

 

Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate = addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling.  Suggestions? = -T

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed = to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To = unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an = email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com= .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 =
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed = to the Google Groups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To = unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an = email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com= .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 =
 

 



_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 <= /o:p>

 

________________=
_______________________________
webfinger mailing =
list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 


______________________________________= _________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

 

------=_NextPart_000_0162_01CE8BED.EE8B9C40-- From melvincarvalho@gmail.com Sun Jul 28 21:05:44 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1D9D21F9F6E for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 21:05:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.539 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.539 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.060, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J5d04Fb5-Rr3 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 21:05:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x22e.google.com (mail-lb0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6AAA21F9F51 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 21:05:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f174.google.com with SMTP id x10so3889751lbi.33 for ; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 21:05:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=vyuqTnuBkGMlnaUn855d6P1hkvxUxcScgeT8NZXEsCk=; b=M8yqEmyf9atpB36q3XP3rLL5JjbMGAn2xmOuBPQkvFtdUb/o9uSUL7I2DMUwPmMALY DM14ykRWOBwiqVNLyO5Icl8zjq3X+3xIALlK+CdeHi+B2YRlOqPrCuu8AVpqj6nQQYeY kb7bdz/ddLSpOKGpVvfZc4oUUR70ifX9CDF4pQc+iZJsE2yM2c8EDQS/XBlSG0Qi7wiH qDvQPISaLgxNftu3wxe3VKCEqBOVFFH2nk4ggYL7GgrQZ6lUmEV9ZtwT163mqYW9CDz9 BQQMmCh5FH0pMW5yNlgq6Ra2z34ISfSU6/HMBDH5VUdZjiAyR1x7CQ28xns2+1tAwxuK h1Ww== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.157.137 with SMTP id wm9mr24841681lbb.14.1375070738467; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 21:05:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.59.193 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Jul 2013 21:05:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <016101ce8c0f$759aa430$60cfec90$@packetizer.com> References: <00d301ce80ff$fffd76e0$fff864a0$@packetizer.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F7E7A@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436B6F81E7@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <1374516883.73070.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51EEDE9C.8020105@gluu.org> <05cb01ce87de$62c09200$2841b600$@packetizer.com> <51EEE28E.7080604@gluu.org> <016101ce8c0f$759aa430$60cfec90$@packetizer.com> Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 06:05:38 +0200 Message-ID: From: Melvin Carvalho To: "Paul E. Jones" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c29654e853ef04e29e9a80 Cc: webfinger , Javier Rojas Blum , Tim Bray , Edmund Jay , openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 04:05:44 -0000 --001a11c29654e853ef04e29e9a80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 29 July 2013 05:55, Paul E. Jones wrote: > Melvin,**** > > ** ** > > Ideally, new values would be registered with IANA. That ought to come in > the form of an RFC to fully explain their purpose so that there is no > misunderstanding as to the intent of any particular =93rel=94 value.**** > > ** ** > > The =93blog=94 one I assigned under the packetizer.com domain was done si= nce > there wasn=92t one (AFAIK) that meant precisely the same thing. I expect > some non-registered values will conflict with other non-registered values= . > That=92s OK. People build products and need an identifier. We see this = with > every protocol. Once there is a certain amount of momentum for it and/or > people feel a =93rel=94 ought to be registered because it has wide > applicability, then definitely register a value. > Regarding blog there's a few such as FOAF, DOAP, SIOC, Schema.org, vivo and others. I would think foaf : weblog is the most common ( http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/weblog ) Here's a handy tool for finding existing properties http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/search/#s=3Dblog In a general sense, I would suggest best practice reusing where possible. Otherwise create a new URL. Only in a few cases, when you are sure there's no clash or ambiguity to go for the registry route. > **** > > ** ** > > Paul**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Sunday, July 28, 2013 6:58 PM > *To:* Javier Rojas Blum > *Cc:* Paul E. Jones; webfinger; Tim Bray; > openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Edmund Jay > > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > On 23 July 2013 22:07, Javier Rojas Blum wrote:**** > > Please try this: > https://seed.gluu.org/.well-known/webfinger?resource=3Dacct:javier@seed.g= luu.org&rel=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fconnect%2F1.0%2Fissuer > **** > > ** ** > > I'm seeing a lot of global keys ("rel" parameters) that are not in the > official registry: > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml**** > > e.g. evan's "favourites" "lists", nick's "auth-endpoint", paul's "test" > and quite a few more -- it seems something of a free for all, how are > clients supposed to interpret these?**** > > some of these links do not resolve anywhere such as : > http://schemas.google.com/g/2010%23updates-from**** > > others such as "http://packetizer.com/rel/blog" seem to be creating > existing concepts -- would it not be better to reuse things long standing > dictionaries such foaf, schema.org, sioc, open graph protocol etc.**** > > **** > > > Regards > > -- Javier**** > > > > > On 07/23/2013 03:54 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote:**** > > I get a 200 OK when I query, but the message body appears to be empty.***= * > > **** > > **** > > *From:* webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] > *On Behalf Of *Javier Rojas Blum > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:51 PM > *To:* Edmund Jay > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim > Bray; Paul E. Jones > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > **** > > acct:javier@seed.gluu.org > acct:mike@seed.gluu.org > > -- Javier > > > On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Jay wrote:**** > > The following can be used : **** > > **** > > alice@connect.openid4.us or**** > > bob@connect.openid4.us**** > > **** > > -- Edmund**** > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Mike Jones > *To:* "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" > ; > Tim Bray ; Paul E. Jones > > *Cc:* "webfinger@ietf.org" > *Sent:* Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:51 PM > *Subject:* RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > **** > > Could those of you with OpenID OPs that support discovery please post > specific identifiers using e-mail address syntax that Tim could use for > testing e-mail based discovery using WebFinger?**** > > **** > > Thanks all,**= * > * > > -- Mike**** > > **** > > *From:* openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [ > mailto:openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com] > *On Behalf Of *Mike Jones > *Sent:* Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM > *To:* Tim Bray; Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com > *Subject:* RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > **** > > See http://osis.idcommons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID > providers, most of which implement Discovery, including WebFinger.**** > > **** > > -- Mike**** > > **** > > *From:* webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] > *On Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM > *To:* Paul E. Jones > *Cc:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > **** > > Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=3D > http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer**** > > **** > > On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones > wrote:**** > > Tim,**** > > **** > > You=92re welcome to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: = *** > * > > **** > > Most of what is returned is just test data (though some is valid), but it > should be properly formatted.**** > > **** > > I have aliases, properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: > reply. I=92m happy to throw something in if you want to check a particul= ar > response.**** > > **** > > Paul**** > > **** > > *From:* webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] *O= n > Behalf Of *Tim Bray > *Sent:* Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM > *To:* webfinger@ietf.org > *Subject:* [webfinger] Looking for JRDs**** > > **** > > Working on some WF code... looking for some candidate addresses/domains t= o > test JRD wrangling. Suggestions? -T**** > > **** > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "OpenID Connect Interop" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > **** > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "OpenID Connect Interop" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > **** > > **** > > > > **** > > _______________________________________________**** > > webfinger mailing list**** > > webfinger@ietf.org**** > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger**** > > **** > > ** ** > > _______________________________________________**** > > webfinger mailing list**** > > webfinger@ietf.org**** > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger**** > > ** ** > > > _______________________________________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger**** > > ** ** > --001a11c29654e853ef04e29e9a80 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On 29 July 2013 05:55, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Melvin,

=A0

<= p class=3D"">Ideally, new values would be r= egistered with IANA.=A0 That ought to come in the form of an RFC to fully e= xplain their purpose so that there is no misunderstanding as to the intent = of any particular =93rel=94 value.

=A0

<= p class=3D"">The =93blog=94 one I assigned = under the packetizer.co= m domain was done since there wasn=92t one (AFAIK) that meant precisely= the same thing.=A0 I expect some non-registered values will conflict with = other non-registered values.=A0 That=92s OK.=A0 People build products and n= eed an identifier.=A0 We see this with every protocol.=A0 Once there is a c= ertain amount of momentum for it and/or people feel a =93rel=94 ought to be= registered because it has wide applicability, then definitely register a v= alue.


Regarding blo= g there's a few such as FOAF, DOAP, SIOC, Schema.org, vivo and others.= =A0 I would think foaf : weblog is the most common ( http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/weblog )

Here's a handy tool for finding ex= isting properties

http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/search/#s=3Dblog

In a general sense, I would suggest best practice reusing where possible.= =A0 Otherwise create a new URL.=A0 Only in a few cases, when you are sure t= here's no clash or ambiguity to go for the registry route.
=A0

=A0

<= p class=3D"">Paul

=A0

<= div style=3D"border-width:medium medium medium 1.5pt;border-style:none none= none solid;border-color:-moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-t= ext-color blue;padding:0in 0in 0in 4pt">

From: = Melvin Carvalho [mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2013 6:58 PM
To: Javier Rojas Blum<= br>Cc: Paul E. Jones; webfinger; Tim Bray; openid-connect-interop@= googlegroups.com; Edmund Jay


Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs=

=A0

=A0

=A0

On 23 July 2013 22:07, Javier Rojas= Blum <javier@gluu.= org> wrote:

=A0

I'm seeing a lot of global keys ("r= el" parameters) that are not in the official registry:

http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relatio= ns.xhtml

e.g. evan's "= ;favourites" "lists", nick's "auth-endpoint", = paul's "test" and quite a few more -- it seems something of a= free for all, how are clients supposed to interpret these?

some of these links d= o not resolve anywhere such as : http://schemas.google.com/g/2010%23upda= tes-from

others such as "http://packetizer.com/rel/blog" se= em to be creating existing concepts -- would it not be better to reuse thin= gs long standing dictionaries such foaf, schema.org, sioc, open graph protocol etc.<= /p>

=A0


Regards<= br>
-- Javier



On 07/23/2013 03:54 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote:

I get a 200 OK when I query, but t= he message body appears to be empty.

=A0

<= p class=3D"">=A0

From: webfinger-bounces@ietf.org [= mailto:webf= inger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Javier Rojas Blum
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:51 PM
To: Edmund Jay
= Cc: webfinger@i= etf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com; Tim Bray; Paul = E. Jones
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

=A0

acct:javier@seed.gluu.o= rg
acct:mike@seed= .gluu.org

-- Javier


On 07/22/2013 02:14 PM, Edmund Ja= y wrote:

The following can be used :=A0

=A0

<= a href=3D"mailto:alice@connect.openid4.us" target=3D"_blank">alice@connect.= openid4.us or

bob@connect.openid4.us

=A0

-- Edmund

From: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com><= /a>
To: "openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com" <= openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com>; Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>; = Paul E. Jones &l= t;paulej@packetizer.com>
Cc: "we= bfinger@ietf.org" <webfinger@ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 20, = 2013 10:51 PM
Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

= =A0

Could those of you with= OpenID OPs that support discovery please post specific identifiers using e= -mail address syntax that Tim could use for testing e-mail based discovery = using WebFinger?

=A0<= /u>

=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0 Thanks all,

=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 -- Mike

=A0<= /u>

<= span style=3D"font-size:10pt">From: openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com [mailto:openid-connect-i= nterop@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 4:34 PM
To: Tim Bray; Paul E= . Jones
Cc: webfinger@ietf.org; openid-connect-interop@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

=A0

See http://osis.idcom= mons.net/wiki/Category:OC5_OP for a list of OpenID providers, most of w= hich implement Discovery, including WebFinger.

=A0<= /u>

=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0 -- Mike

=A0

From: we= bfinger-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of <= /b>Tim Bray
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:34 PM
To: Paul E. Jones
<= b>Cc: webfinger= @ietf.org
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Looking for JRDs=

Got an OpenID Connect provider? rel=3Dhttp://op= enid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer

=A0

<= div>

On Su= n, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

Tim,=

=A0

You=92re welcome= to test my addresses, including mailto: / acct: / xmpp: <= /u>

=A0<= /u>

Most of what is returne= d is just test data (though some is valid), but it should be properly forma= tted.

=A0

I have aliases, = properties, titles, and non-ASCII characters in the acct: reply.=A0 I=92m h= appy to throw something in if you want to check a particular response.

=A0<= /u>

Paul

=A0

<= span style=3D"font-size:10pt">From: webfinge= r-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:webfinger-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim= Bray
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 5:54 PM
To: webfinger@ietf.org
Subject:= [webfinger] Looking for JRDs

=A0

Working on some WF code... looking for some ca= ndidate addresses/domains to test JRD wrangling.=A0 Suggestions? -T<= u>

=A0

--
Y= ou received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &q= uot;OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to openid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
=A0=A0

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google G= roups "OpenID Connect Interop" group.
To unsubscribe from this= group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to op= enid-connect-interop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
=A0=A0

=A0



_______________________________=
________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf=
.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/w=
ebfinger

=A0

=A0

_____________________=
__________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf=
.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/w=
ebfinger

=A0


____________________________________= ___________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

=A0

=

--001a11c29654e853ef04e29e9a80-- From mrkrcsmith@googlemail.com Wed Jul 31 03:15:28 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E17E21E80C9 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 03:15:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yAq-d1lK-Tdv for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 03:15:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-bk0-x231.google.com (mail-bk0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4008:c01::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1969B21E8082 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 03:15:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-bk0-f49.google.com with SMTP id r7so174650bkg.8 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 03:15:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qa0EYbfQ6YAdzQTGf1EE4nTTvPlGQy2bdo90S2s7U8g=; b=u6HRDn36h5bCnUumTPVAOosraBEXvM1pIwtf2e/qyQ4lzpAgNgvPEUfh5zntL1Pjys i1ehdTiwgUWv4893vaHNmxcb5AykZCTfDFCKl9lDX1ffcvhW+LY8BoNP/wlpgD64VqR7 AwaeeF1+LFFozcyus8vPVBv9ZPxb2Cb1SWl8isauM1T29ncqugPXZZvHaU8sgOrx+kJd BnDpYpMqvspCEVohgv8zIHuTc4EMoF7rhMj6hy/Tksn96e/LmWUm8m+pFcFCn+dJlfhY cao4SGtWohGWSNtKdg57tCqhuEZp5ykIGBM6pHRHCe9QHPOMN8+AaHc92+DpF+3NYotk OVcw== X-Received: by 10.204.190.71 with SMTP id dh7mr5040712bkb.138.1375265721113; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 03:15:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from KEVIN-SMITHs-MacBook-Air-3.local (cpc5-tonb3-2-0-cust37.croy.cable.virginmedia.com. [82.40.186.38]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ps10sm268253bkb.14.2013.07.31.03.15.19 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 31 Jul 2013 03:15:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51F8E3B6.8010002@googlemail.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 11:15:18 +0100 From: Kevin Smith User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: webfinger@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 03:16:12 -0700 Subject: [webfinger] create/update JRD via Webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 10:15:28 -0000 Hi all, Is there any intention for Webfinger to support the creation/update of resource descriptors? For example, an internal system wants to create the JRD related to a newly created user registration, or to update a JRD for bert@example.com to add some new link relations. Maybe by adding POST/PATCH support against the Webfinger resource.... Many thanks! Kevin Kevin Smith, Vodafone R&D From melvincarvalho@gmail.com Wed Jul 31 04:41:23 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: webfinger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ED5821F9C90 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 04:41:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.716 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.716 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.783, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, SARE_HTML_USL_OBFU=1.666] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I+mEaFqHyy7x for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 04:41:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x234.google.com (mail-la0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B2CA21F9C78 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 04:41:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f52.google.com with SMTP id fq13so406663lab.25 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 04:41:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=jJASpU3Mu34ThtyEHxq4Ztv/RrOGFwbpKLk89TCYkWA=; b=z5K4jwVgKsPYGwKs02n3dkXrAiZNna8SMYUflJu+VYYRml7T514QPbQ1JCwKfVqVNh KplQNVoyqnSNDnEdDmRD02gsmM4rC9VUBqk5NEwIRWhObJRJIx268O/sFE2nU7P+8LYf rm/pnZPtdhh6d+yaW5BDQGXmHgQ/RG6rKwJybFGaKJmDflgW8J9o6F69EN6RKYybxdfQ LQFmye7m6Nj+FqQsNIUKIqCsibbnBa8AE/Qdz9xxsZnLwjAUWwvekZBvZN10YRgBM711 c8HTIK71TEWoaBqTZCqquBDLOHWG56zqEgqo1e4rHmQRTExIYoGKzeD8F+ifXeaXObMl GISg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.120.37 with SMTP id kz5mr4755656lab.21.1375270879278; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 04:41:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.59.193 with HTTP; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 04:41:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51F8E3B6.8010002@googlemail.com> References: <51F8E3B6.8010002@googlemail.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:41:19 +0200 Message-ID: From: Melvin Carvalho To: Kevin Smith Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e012281483abb8f04e2cd34b0 Cc: webfinger Subject: Re: [webfinger] create/update JRD via Webfinger X-BeenThere: webfinger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the Webfinger protocol proposal in the Applications Area List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 11:41:23 -0000 --089e012281483abb8f04e2cd34b0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 31 July 2013 12:15, Kevin Smith wrote: > Hi all, > > Is there any intention for Webfinger to support the creation/update of > resource descriptors? For example, an internal system wants to create the > JRD related to a newly created user registration, or to update a JRD for > bert@example.com to add some new link relations. Maybe by adding > POST/PATCH support against the Webfinger resource.... > The most common way to do something like this is in line with WebDAV, where PUT creates a new document, DELETE removes one and GET reads one. POST is very often used as an append technology, tho POST can be implemented however a server wants to POST can be very useful with a query language to perform adds, deletes and updates PATCH is an interesting one, and there's JSON PATCH [1] which *may* be able to be standardized after JRD is completed Personally I'd use a custom script to do this right now, or use another serialization more suited to updates, and keep it in kilter with the JRD Something like the Linked Data Platform [2] would be a good template for this too [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6902 [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-ldp-20130730/ > > Many thanks! > Kevin > > Kevin Smith, Vodafone R&D > > > ______________________________**_________________ > webfinger mailing list > webfinger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/webfinger > --089e012281483abb8f04e2cd34b0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On 31 July 2013 12:15, Kevin Smith <mrkrcsmith@googlemail.= com> wrote:
Hi all,

Is there any intention for Webfinger to support the creation/update of reso= urce descriptors? For example, an internal system wants to create the JRD r= elated to a newly created user registration, or to update a JRD for bert@example.com to add = some new link relations. Maybe by adding POST/PATCH support against the Web= finger resource....

The most common way to do= something like this is in line with WebDAV, where PUT creates a new docume= nt, DELETE removes one and GET reads one.

POST is very often used as an append technology, tho POST can be implemente= d however a server wants to

POST ca= n be very useful with a query language to perform adds, deletes and updates=

PATCH= is an interesting one, and there's JSON PATCH [1] which *may* be able = to be standardized after JRD is completed

Personally I'd use a custom script to do this right now, or use another= serialization more suited to updates, and keep it in kilter with the JRD
Something like the Linked Data Platf= orm [2] would be a good template for this too

[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6902
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-ldp-20130730/=
=A0

Many thanks!
Kevin

Kevin Smith, Vodafone R&D


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webfinger@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger

--089e012281483abb8f04e2cd34b0--