From nobody Tue Jun 5 13:34:14 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0902F131165 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 13:34:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.698 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WSNXMMGRWUBJ for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 13:34:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf0-x232.google.com (mail-lf0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79201130DE5 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 13:34:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x232.google.com with SMTP id n3-v6so5615513lfe.12 for ; Tue, 05 Jun 2018 13:34:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=3GJAlBrp2QomKfzzFqlVawxt7CWB74hRVE0JgLzowwA=; b=K0qMzRnHvvTFFNQD8Jb8yIsiRqZfSIQf3a46JGeAUS7vJ6l7yb1IoBtE8GH7MuV3xj izgWbA4xNQbpaZ+cmqWh/gZxI9NbAu3XX5bo4LhYUNgiLF05tsSpiiByAv5ahz0cWkqn 1+PUDvXcghU7LE1f7LTllYDr24tB6XksBzCayh2GbhKpenkR1DWHnigtR+w/HOytEdry epxD6o1IgSjEPZziS6qFjEH29bXsLTnZnFOPASS1R7SxHi8Rc3hBmhLapxgXmUQDbuzA B4TYeQwfZ4FPccn8mEMn6NC7e0b8mZWGpCacmjV42Uz7HlgC32GwR9Roavi+woLKY2fG UDKw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=3GJAlBrp2QomKfzzFqlVawxt7CWB74hRVE0JgLzowwA=; b=J7OSX7LIAuIesgKxeiKtfws52kVi53OGYzjt1lLIEzCRxGVLN5O4VWb+3pVDHyf9YA lt/gl60m0LHzqHc8drFH0cOS3tM0rAP3i4NRZTpsTyNX7y6jPyjg20DFGOFkZEy2Lnrv XhzdQJPaTtTDspHmbdHdXQrIfjGvofRJNqy3pjkzdRyKwePWyTS6pEAEz8tvvQd4czJh nL6k0Bngu7FnCfzSuUS4mZJg1bHGerrNBMkSCEqGK2eSRk44BaCsZBEGekqFZ+ayrU0l 6tPhqCN47/Yb7WjvDAXZGwHthyJ/rPfknwURUFDUEu70dfM/JrXGlyL4+bKTIW7QbsSv YvWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1YPeZHN1JF2nmsSL2NGRYr1iEwnWRhsVyc+IqzMT0a4h8RyBsf wEUmusRzFLidZeqHS0zn04WyesJlSzCbw1sQVUU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKJKGjXxLKuO2LDGLeEo7///6PvbyOb+Tb5GgwMOMkn4WY4taxl8AjMj0fc9jSa6iS7VVjp5mdMtaU4lZ5knAPY= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:6f02:: with SMTP id k2-v6mr101893ljc.72.1528230847310; Tue, 05 Jun 2018 13:34:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a2e:8549:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 13:34:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Mary Barnes Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 15:34:06 -0500 Message-ID: To: DISPATCH Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c9ee7e056deaf84b" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] IETF-102 DISPATCH WG deadlines X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 20:34:13 -0000 --000000000000c9ee7e056deaf84b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, Here's another reminder. At this point, we've only heard from one person by the June 4th deadline. Please note the June 11th deadline. The chairs and ADs will be meeting shortly after that deadline (on June 13th), so if you want us to consider your proposal for the agenda, we need to know about it. Regards, Mary On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:03 PM, Mary Barnes wrote: > HI all, > > This is a reminder of the IETF-102 deadlines: > > - June 1, 2018. Cutoff date for IETF BoF submissions. > - June 4, 2018. Cutoff date to notify the chairs/DISPATCH WG of plans > to submit a proposal. > - June 11, 2018. Cutoff for charter proposals (i.e., problem statement > and proposed deliverables) for topics posted to the DISPATCH WG mailin= g > list. > - June 18, 2018. Announcement of topics that have been dispatched for > IETF-102. > - July 2, 2018. Draft submission deadline. > > These are posted on the wiki along with a link to the official deadlines > along with precise times: > > https://trac.ietf.org/trac/dispatch/wiki > > > As usual, priority for agenda time is given to the topics that meet the > deadlines. Topics received after the deadlines will be handled as time > allows. Note, for the last meeting we got a number of requests well > after the deadline. However, we had only scheduled our session for 1.5 > hours, with the remaining hour used for the MODERN WG session. So, if > you want your topic on the agenda, then please let the chairs (and WG) kn= ow > ASAP so we can ensure we have a session with adequate time scheduled. > > > Also, as a reminder, the problem statement does not have to be a full > blown charter. We just want to see a clear statement of the problem you > are trying to solve and a rough notion of the deliverables you think migh= t > be needed to solve that problem. > > > If you aren=E2=80=99t sure about any of this, please contact the chairs. > > > Regards, > > Mary DISPATCH WG tri-chair > > --000000000000c9ee7e056deaf84b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi all,

Here's another reminder.=C2= =A0 At this point, we've only heard from one person by the June 4th dea= dline.=C2=A0 Please note the June 11th deadline.=C2=A0 =C2=A0The chairs and= ADs will be meeting shortly after that deadline (on June 13th), so if you = want us to consider your proposal for the agenda, we need to know about it.= =C2=A0

Regards,
Mary

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2= :03 PM, Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com> wr= ote:
HI all,

This is a reminder of the IE= TF-102 deadlines:=C2=A0

  • June 1, 2018. Cutoff date for IETF BoF s= ubmissions.
  • June 4, 2018. Cutoff date to notify the chairs/DISP= ATCH WG of plans to submit a proposal.
  • June 11, 2018. Cutoff fo= r charter proposals (i.e., problem statement and proposed deliverables) for= topics posted to the DISPATCH WG mailing list.
  • June 18, 2018. = Announcement of topics that have been dispatched for IETF-102.
  • = July 2, 2018. Draft submission deadline.

These are posted on the wiki= along with a link to the official deadlines along with precise times:=C2= =A0

= http= s://trac.ietf.org/trac/dispatch/wiki


As usual, priority for agend= a time is given to the topics that meet the deadlines.=C2=A0 Topics received a= fter the deadlines will be handled as time allows.=C2=A0 Note, for the last me= eting we got a number of requests well after the deadline.=C2=A0 However, we h= ad only scheduled our session for 1.5 hours, with the remaining hour used f= or the MODERN WG session.=C2=A0 So, if you want your topic on the agenda, then= please let the chairs (and WG) know ASAP so we can ensure we have a sessio= n with adequate time scheduled.


Also, as a reminder, the pro= blem statement does not have to be a full blown charter.=C2=A0 We just want to= see a clear statement of the problem you are trying to solve and a rough n= otion of the deliverables you think might be needed to solve that problem.<= span class=3D"m_5737491910491580593gmail-Apple-converted-space">=C2=A0=C2= =A0


If you aren=E2=80=99t sure about a= ny of this, please contact the chairs.


Regards,

Mary DISPATCH WG tri-chair



--000000000000c9ee7e056deaf84b-- From nobody Tue Jun 5 15:08:53 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C9D1130DEC for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 15:08:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=nightwatchcybersecurity-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TXWZzd5jgche for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 15:08:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pl0-x22d.google.com (mail-pl0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9BA7130DEB for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 15:08:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id z9-v6so2404239plk.11 for ; Tue, 05 Jun 2018 15:08:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nightwatchcybersecurity-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=JYGAS8X4NmHPDd4ZH9NCASQeVEzsut4X7wFZ+kP3IUU=; b=y5B9Kt+sqRHd7qjB3D9rcNfpo+nENFT0rOtQR+7FC+KKh57EcTsh5U6WLHoAxX/SKC 056n4DMSEz0tyDz0fNDfRrhI6rWzL91dr2H16tLl9AoPPv5UptRjaQAencqXasUvsLrV i5B+y99c1DPijqJ3VZvSGrcGohJU/DT+2TY5dY8f4sDSqXrvBS6i2tRIeeg738mHO+Vp sLUYbS5LB9h8DY7+FhJa8b77neVr3a1vVNUSkYgyk3W7ejIFboq2QaTu1ABLyGW4lwqN N0cOVeDmXji5hk/5jaYPzgCv6QnJ8/AXe3cO7uc68WVRQd5pNU9U204jrIdGpL+v5LWq valg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=JYGAS8X4NmHPDd4ZH9NCASQeVEzsut4X7wFZ+kP3IUU=; b=q0PasEHiGJHqHQ0Bl5D5e6yZh6kes3Jl1jgNu6wMIc4tnPZxai54vfpIimPYtUhueX TOVbD9iMOg2xgGoDfKUjZJkH31Vg7GVZFV4tplKU2GjU2qe03trBxuXCTtQuGGPO+7OG G9wgEOJqrrxdoUXTFYMmxuYVqZkejhv9nxVKIr+U/ysP0MSbeYc9hwoRYo89pn6VdAQd XSiOGyl8IwsD1WKI2dQ7kbN5MqKsX2TQm/5+hqoufSd+pgLsqmn+NLZJjv+DjL+pxOTe Kc9BjwfIrHVJAyJNykVHeywTP35uh1U0xcTSdsld/txxVgvLRirG2XP74PUrQf8Yvscw vzUA== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E3uNKqiGty0nPVu76ZVy6roS410Eb/jW8AjSzCBLh2KHokyr6j5 d+OwmBCZdHnOJA7CmpWwHkCzyBQd7xqhRrukSftdGf+S X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKKuQnnBc1tSaMmAX0Gy9JXmQXcoGkJnvyzAAAX73AWJAFpriZpb1LMglZTBAmudh1YpfxYPhwrudmOZj7WSmZs= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8b8c:: with SMTP id ay12-v6mr425643plb.74.1528236527831; Tue, 05 Jun 2018 15:08:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a17:90a:94c3:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 15:08:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <152782037805.14857.15616903006929369460.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <152782037805.14857.15616903006929369460.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Yakov Shafranovich Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 18:08:07 -0400 Message-ID: To: dispatch@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [dispatch] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-shafranovich-privacy-mailbox-00.txt X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 22:08:52 -0000 I wanted to run this small proposal past the list. Not sure if DISPATCH is the best place or not, but its email related and seems to fall under the ART area. Thanks ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Date: Thu, May 31, 2018 at 10:32 PM Subject: New Version Notification for draft-shafranovich-privacy-mailbox-00.txt To: Yakov Shafranovich A new version of I-D, draft-shafranovich-privacy-mailbox-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Yakov Shafranovich and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-shafranovich-privacy-mailbox Revision: 00 Title: Common Mailbox Name for Privacy Issues Document date: 2018-05-31 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 3 URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-shafranovich-privacy-mailbox-00.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-shafranovich-privacy-mailbox/ Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-shafranovich-privacy-mailbox-00 Htmlized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-shafranovich-privacy-mailbox Abstract: Multiple Internet standards describe common mailbox names (mailbox @ domain) to be used by organizations for operational and business functions. This document defines a new mailbox called "privacy" that SHOULD be used for contacting domain name owners about privacy issues. Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. The IETF Secretariat From nobody Thu Jun 7 14:06:14 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E52DC130FA8 for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2018 14:06:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.801 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.801 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yandex.ru Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HBnbiJRujlpy for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2018 14:06:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from forward102j.mail.yandex.net (forward102j.mail.yandex.net [5.45.198.243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2D79130F96 for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2018 14:06:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxback6j.mail.yandex.net (mxback6j.mail.yandex.net [IPv6:2a02:6b8:0:1619::10f]) by forward102j.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 9BC905606A57 for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2018 00:05:57 +0300 (MSK) Received: from localhost (localhost [::1]) by mxback6j.mail.yandex.net (nwsmtp/Yandex) with ESMTP id kG3sH4uXOt-5uLO1lG7; Fri, 08 Jun 2018 00:05:57 +0300 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1528405557; bh=P2PZrQioqCLiNbipcjP46dkPrLEDC85fQtf051/f+IE=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-Id; b=Z9s/4DJ+Mz2EYQBJThry/DZdPMMJvCsS29FgKOC4phU1YtMSyT2r570QqKzQU6RAb T9XKGuJpZJTqdehGBxkFj8b+xc5gYDGIsK0IOKD7OGRfTFxAccQKnCkirmAFnKFiDt GiWOkrvfHOkIJqrzxWjurbvRmUC4NL+p68FDZQ/8= Authentication-Results: mxback6j.mail.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.ru Received: by web21g.yandex.ru with HTTP; Fri, 08 Jun 2018 00:05:56 +0300 From: Anton Tveretin To: DISPATCH list MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Yamail [ http://yandex.ru ] 5.0 Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 02:05:56 +0500 Message-Id: <1716001528405556@web21g.yandex.ru> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] draft-shafranovich-privacy-mailbox-00 X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2018 21:06:09 -0000 I see potential compatibility issue here. What if someone uses privacy mailbox already? Maybe anyone has statistics about abuse (e.g., spam) of existing "predefined" addresses, as postmaster or webmaster? From nobody Wed Jun 13 06:43:10 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89668130E36 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 06:43:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JVhWLWVpH5zn for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 06:43:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf0-x235.google.com (mail-lf0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4119130E29 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 06:43:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x235.google.com with SMTP id v135-v6so4011444lfa.9 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 06:43:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jf7fcEOybo4mKlEwxMnrRht6+4K1Q0eRlQTc0tG7+/c=; b=o5AkjhzKlc6nQ4m5MRQi0RJwmqehw2zQGAI59pQDx49uwBoW3ZHLrnmq7jp2T2MrYh suxEfYzwRplGEL/Ev7ftfvYK1ioVp3xS1GmPdbuIiYLYmp6DH13ZparcFYaM6NoO/62M MmqMOjKDijV6jsSBzVezixgAbprMKgJJ0gC4Otp8X8j7DY9wNGpcfW4asDgUWdBXlGxu 3lqx68loAb+TuEnfvskGvLlFrgVbhz/ZmiC6bIL2Wg98j9PmN+h5SACjKf/Izo0wEb23 umWjQ7GXbMwHqzxJnrVwWJ0hdegKrLKIrX0ieCOzsJKZ4bJq7KzspAhLTd6xs81TEH2U oJGw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jf7fcEOybo4mKlEwxMnrRht6+4K1Q0eRlQTc0tG7+/c=; b=ocfek+yP+GTXV8/pCIk+psgVALoUZ2B68n+nVrHBu8C6gM5M7w9/hKEMwcjV+PEYu7 qUD9w8aflBWxZvs++sDAmISkYYHxk5yrmZSw9Is4qBT6uR0WWVy13l30GZbEDNoC3ptM xINWmU/e0Vw7SEFZHI3zGQkK04vIWWFeaPm+amtdNXJbcWk8csc93vpEO0omOrdshCcM hMLdEzT+6qpXdUT7AqHcPDiiv+yvdLjecomyPWQ2YaQLZEhfy4y0FPG6O+7hVIKrKNN0 XZepS96CDZPAeC6gO6vtZi4ayjSW2Cwu+8kAZRqRYMaBMGi5Aq5km4oYeqO4NYXr4179 WMRQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1rhPdEBN3ptudmAY8vt7obcbVhLtOBnB1vC6p1d5QW5YP0e4SB OqvG99G51BlWtaaOsp87izmzJxoVZoyfDzmkYuDs/w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKI+wXsDF7VF2KcCMqvM7OGtm/aT4QK7nNe+MPvK2oW7Tyo9Fuzg6NUZ1DJfCf7/dXDplxmXFLd51ia1kQb4kjo= X-Received: by 2002:a19:be53:: with SMTP id o80-v6mr3301897lff.140.1528897383480; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 06:43:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a2e:8350:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 06:43:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <152782037805.14857.15616903006929369460.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 06:43:02 -0700 Message-ID: To: Yakov Shafranovich Cc: DISPATCH list Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000070c9ff056e86298b" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-shafranovich-privacy-mailbox-00.txt X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 13:43:08 -0000 --00000000000070c9ff056e86298b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 3:08 PM, Yakov Shafranovich < yakov@nightwatchcybersecurity.com> wrote: > I wanted to run this small proposal past the list. Not sure if > DISPATCH is the best place or not, but its email related and seems to > fall under the ART area. > I would suggest posting it to some or all of ietf-smtp@ietf.org, ietf-822@ietf.org, and art@ietf.org to get interested reviewers. This list is mainly for DISPATCH work items. Are you requesting agenda time for IETF 102? -MSK --00000000000070c9ff056e86298b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 3:08 PM, Yakov Shafranovich <yakov@nightwatchcybersecurity.com> wrote:
I wanted to run this small proposal past the list. Not sure if DISPATCH is the best place or not, but its email related and seems to
fall under the ART area.

I would sugges= t posting it to some or all of ietf-smtp@ietf.org, ie= tf-822@ietf.org, and = art@ietf.org to get interested reviewers.=C2=A0 This list is mainly for= DISPATCH work items.

Are you requesting agend= a time for IETF 102?

-MSK
--00000000000070c9ff056e86298b-- From nobody Wed Jun 13 07:20:52 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CB1B130E31 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 07:20:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tXgJcFpXzAW0 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 07:20:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io0-x22d.google.com (mail-io0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61B92130E30 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 07:20:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id d185-v6so3628201ioe.0 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 07:20:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=JtoYDbHko7T4BnPJBQ8NXwQAjmf7H6tps1Cn1QlnxzA=; b=ia2+mypCEgQcAOYwQU4fTWPIEFbQtUhfvt264KbTvVsfyRtIBkMrcuYIyfmtjNM7TW uTc846q5oZL68TRpZMK+KGF0blp1jAB9ZCTnI8EEw+vMReyaKIF07yt69dnD4XTHYZcV OLdetoZmVr3brVOGF9YQEBD4ce2RI4UVpM9UF86sss2/oToo9sojK62HP1S/OKoivBHo oObz6rh4HQOT6ioAA1DCPplINToItpTqB9m7VClejSinib+lZ0HgQ8B92bvtwKIXhxC/ C+GZ3M6OobHYaIQmTc9IoOWqd/WD/9axy9qMrPBwoMCF3iHWLfIg7ClouBCb9EifPE09 KYIw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=JtoYDbHko7T4BnPJBQ8NXwQAjmf7H6tps1Cn1QlnxzA=; b=Z1CMzOkfyTD3codSY3VUy7IuUaxFcNAZmX23YFEwhW9oaH9WCgMXDzeevccfOLckIf S13GEkWhksr8jHk0MZOH1zCXjMrOMPRpYnqK+SgiLruq02Uy/RpvyfiL75PXWwpQDaEB huWSDfgOdAMZHopglOVsSlKpVkj8HHAXT48A8ZlRzBQ+swkKfIpFzz3g1FKKjL5MzVWo FjS4dHVNhrTRGwSLTZuws5MfG0/JKqvoP8AgTpNso7T9kR1vMGCydgQwotYZ6Ja7btE9 cxz2JMfmzKDgf2XV37SozZD/wqdb0MnwIk8EQHeI2rkYFPVkf854XcUA+zg313QHql86 CBmw== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E2n7YtOKYp1mRBl4JvgZPFJuWhTcsRLwI21dYxttPNkLGuDl5/W zNQAxamr0Ju4iUegx6iUSPTtBgkyuo6QKCBzaeVbORBW X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIuiC8kb5JgFh05tUgsTnUMrJxRdF24zj7/gUs5yb9e/Bfi5XqsaxU/JPYGGXQQOfi7EI4gUDP2vnfHglRNbYA= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:b00a:: with SMTP id z10-v6mr4703732ioe.211.1528899645410; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 07:20:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a4f:9e08:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 07:20:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Bradley Meck Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:20:24 -0500 Message-ID: To: DISPATCH Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004313c5056e86b04b" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-02: goal parameter X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 14:20:49 -0000 --0000000000004313c5056e86b04b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sorry for the late reply, I am new to some of this process. I'd refer https://github.com/bmeck/I-D/issues/1#issuecomment-322554737 , and the comments leading up to it. The original intent of this draft was to introduce things related to JS Modules and the syntactic goal related to them. The addition of the MIMEs to reflect reality was done according to your comments in the issue tracker. This draft could be split, but I would not personally submit one with just the new MIME registrations as that was not the original intent of this draft. There is a problem of not wanting to implement things before being standardized as Adam Roach points out. I don't think that reflecting the reality of implementations is possible if implementations such as Node won't ship the parameter without it being standardized. I also don't think separating to match reality makes much sense for additional features like new file extensions when it comes to file extensions as WHATWG explicitly states to not use file extensions during MIME sniffing. Per the changes related to JS Modules: It seems that Allen and I think it is useful. * We are both members of TC39, which is in charge of the JS language specification and there is an open issue tracking this MIME update. * That tracking issue does not have any disagreement with the current changes. I am also a Node.js contributor with heavy involvement in the upcoming Module work, and am seeking to use MIME as a means to disambiguate the intended interpretation of source texts. Adam of IETF remarks that it makes sense to land it preemptively if it would be useful later. Per the comment of lack of interest from WHATWG: * It seems Firefox is interested. * Node has interest but no say in WHATWG, if it did there would have the required 2 party interest if I understand things. * No outstanding disagreement on the feature seems to be found on a quick search. Seems like just a lack of interest, not a statement that the parameter should not exist. The lack of Node as a relevant figure in WHATWG I think shows how this MIME can be useful outside of browsers and strengthens that lack of interest from WHATWG does not mean lack of utility for other technologies. I don't think a change to this update is needed, but am going to reach out to these parties again and see if they would like to reply here as well. Cheers, Bradley On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:03 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > I'm not convinced adding a goal parameter at this point is useful > since not all JavaScript hosts seem keen on adopting it. In > particular, a change proposal to the HTML Standard has not gotten > sufficient implementer interest: > https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/3205. > > I'd much prefer it if the registration was first updated to "match > reality" and additional features are only added if there's actually > sufficient implementers behind them. (Otherwise you have another > Cookie2.) > > > -- > https://annevankesteren.nl/ > > _______________________________________________ > dispatch mailing list > dispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > --0000000000004313c5056e86b04b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sorry for the late reply, I am new to some of this pr= ocess.

I'd refer<= span style=3D"font-size:12.8px;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoratio= n-color:initial;float:none;display:inline">=C2=A0https://github.com/bmeck/= I-D/issues/1#issuecomment-322554737=C2=A0, and the comments leading up to it.

The origina= l intent of this draft was to introduce things related to JS Modules and th= e syntactic goal related to them. The addition of the MIMEs to reflect real= ity was done according to your comments in the issue tracker. This draft co= uld be split, but I would not personally submit one with just the new MIME = registrations as that was not the original intent of this draft.

There is a problem of not wanting to implement thing= s before being standardized as Adam Roach points out. I don't think tha= t reflecting the reality of implementations is possible if implementations = such as Node won't ship the parameter without it being standardized.=C2= =A0I also don't think separating to ma= tch reality makes much sense for additional features like new file extensio= ns when it comes to file extensions as WHATWG explicitly states to not use = file extensions during MIME sniffing.=C2=A0

Per the changes related to JS Modu= les:

It seems that Allen and I think it is usef= ul.

* We are both membe= rs of TC39, which is in charge of the JS language specification and there i= s an open issue tracking this MIME update.
* That tracking issue does not have any disagr= eement with the current changes.

I am also a Node.js contributor with heavy involvement in the upc= oming Module work, and am seeking to use MIME as a means to disambiguate th= e intended interpretation of source texts.

Adam of IETF remarks that it makes sense to land it pre= emptively if it would be useful later.

Per the comment of lack of interest from WHATWG:

* It seems Firefox is interested.=
* Node has in= terest but no say in WHATWG, if it did there would have the required 2 part= y interest if I understand things.
* No outs= tanding disagreement on the feature seems to be found on a quick search. Se= ems like just a lack of interest, not a statement that the parameter should= not exist.

The = lack of Node as a relevant figure in WHATWG I think shows how this MIME can= be useful outside of browsers and strengthens that lack of interest from W= HATWG does not mean lack of utility for other technologies.

I don't think a change to this upd= ate is needed, but am going to reach out to these parties again and see if = they would like to reply here as well.

Cheers,
Bradley


On Fri, May 18, 2018 at= 10:03 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:
I'm not convinced adding a goal parameter a= t this point is useful
since not all JavaScript hosts seem keen on adopting it. In
particular, a change proposal to the HTML Standard has not gotten
sufficient implementer interest:
https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/3205.

I'd much prefer it if the registration was first updated to "match=
reality" and additional features are only added if there's actuall= y
sufficient implementers behind them. (Otherwise you have another
Cookie2.)


--
https://annevankesteren.nl/

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

--0000000000004313c5056e86b04b-- From nobody Wed Jun 13 13:18:35 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77033130E59 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 13:18:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.911 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=nightwatchcybersecurity-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YN8EEqbbhrRD for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 13:18:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pf0-x236.google.com (mail-pf0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 86187130E27 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 13:18:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf0-x236.google.com with SMTP id a11-v6so1990093pff.8 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 13:18:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nightwatchcybersecurity-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4j9B6z0SOlu8xY5hUJDSFEGP7ocAWenTPBPy+9HDaU8=; b=TeomPM0x0w2BnfWDmmQkwJ4iiOI+bQ0MoyG3sWAPtbPy4rnXhD5V6O2eYWUF5ICtYg q7YLJWX6JhFrpO0n69JqSgJGHi88GzFz8nnxC7XdQ/qvDzAHH/TkhR8EGFjoDbYZMqu9 Yt2BzIFpwFPouTPIo7S5QKiQxen08Fog9oFHH7mf0vLseL+dYxZ6trNtCv1JXjDif2dz pDHfu11YoO2+azJKsB+Lql86OrIl+DV9yHRhovpbgR4plUlk5VZFgVxTr3RueKW5UEJC sErBbYCo7k1FoOOlY0JnGhnRjuyAfedOFV42a5FEmhjAodwvKr2Ow/eYMFDV5qUJnkNH HY2A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4j9B6z0SOlu8xY5hUJDSFEGP7ocAWenTPBPy+9HDaU8=; b=W9tIG2tv0jvvPE8WfQwsbLNXJTlQ2czRqg0q+VKBUuCsMUfi7TyvSFYyQK7Xg3K24B VDFWA0bgdLnAcB4EvL1rl9zyMBdU9XmlmkcM9XOxDSezLfVnbghnchV0w3PMdnDoSw4z OwkibPtO7oco8GGCfoR0RH7wMVtdjDzB/c+lWCXW3tW309e90Qg55WKZQDcjek7PxeMQ kHyJZi1hJdwn8una6yvPwv8OEgzys43ZWlc45cedQJJj/beYLNjZw8RT0PGyP69PG05S GiYVC2WTJ7qXIPTZct+uNybbO8vF89sTtjVGjwN9KrjApZOamnMlr1/PoIygL+sju/ST Z6FQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E3hc/5kiZXgMv89Jsk/xVqjs+FYcyDKww6J3DatjefwQojNh+Of i2CcGWJ0HX2MwfSd99gLuYUNi3z1hBXEd9VvEH08hA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIqX1qL9n+dRGHIDJEThvsip4oJGykkY+bPcwLPXprudxbkfwonkh+ghQs6pz1+RWq8/73E/JMs9Kq7GJWRMTw= X-Received: by 2002:a63:770f:: with SMTP id s15-v6mr5474201pgc.30.1528921111994; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 13:18:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a17:90a:94c3:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 13:17:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <152782037805.14857.15616903006929369460.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Yakov Shafranovich Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 16:17:51 -0400 Message-ID: To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" Cc: DISPATCH list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-shafranovich-privacy-mailbox-00.txt X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 20:18:35 -0000 I am not requesting any agenda time for IETF 102 since I haven't gotten any feedback yet, so the draft may not be mature enough. I will cross-post to the other lists as suggested. Thank you! On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 9:43 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 3:08 PM, Yakov Shafranovich > wrote: >> >> I wanted to run this small proposal past the list. Not sure if >> DISPATCH is the best place or not, but its email related and seems to >> fall under the ART area. > > > I would suggest posting it to some or all of ietf-smtp@ietf.org, > ietf-822@ietf.org, and art@ietf.org to get interested reviewers. This list > is mainly for DISPATCH work items. > > Are you requesting agenda time for IETF 102? > > -MSK From nobody Thu Jun 14 09:50:41 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24EBE130E4D for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:50:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.4 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mITh9GEHNYPv for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:50:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ot0-x22b.google.com (mail-ot0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66A09130E44 for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:50:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id 101-v6so7860168oth.4 for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:50:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=xDKUnkldHFJpnTVDJgToE/Mnv1oed81wK3QUE1hLEIw=; b=C7AQtNNKFyrf65V0SOPyc/NmRnARymjnibmJplZGYchVjc4gClA1odV1Bd6mkxcz9I GnkdYhqdHWeP4CgD2mmrjhL9GVSG2lg9uCk7H/80wo+GHfSy1xsHQEbyMEpZmQ3bnuCa 0FiVmczJNBfX6VgNNcH5TeuYFiEziK5nJQmv8TqRFH8ZiYaKigb1RvsH3v1OlV9ocK80 j40Jmj2VhIPM7VDEs1cmgL/mTxsFko/nD5PmYl11IryMndovYychE3e+mMg4LjRLvAxC GiS3wYrZanDt00f5KGfl0OC6mP69dnCp2ILAucp2wycleyp5BN6iVHQNkIBK3cOATBP8 vkDw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject :to; bh=xDKUnkldHFJpnTVDJgToE/Mnv1oed81wK3QUE1hLEIw=; b=GJD8l52q2yfKySkZQmoDNK5Zw8/SK44rmQlkCQQvcRPc9f+A8mq2qo1CYf5WLocuI9 6LYetVoC78CchbLInK5jn/GF7C+BJ8YX6ecnhaYahbNUfTnCPBhNLyhlrKZPBzj3eyLj 839EpllmFR/TIAjwaZzjM6oC7asMl1ANy/II1By1tk8cyAW/QnUA8D4arRC9ZohSzVcx qU7+MDz0HUzDKV+HtcEplPfTxI9evTlZEpGL0XFeLyHplrwVUgG4plUILKqt5ZseadjB pqDXA11I3sqJxYjqfQaBt6Y0iH/+E1lufeKszfc3X0C7Dnyp910g+mjybuf1AYR08mQ0 g9Jw== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E3HWn/Xw6FnRO+Rc2N/jy731v/XzNLlKmZVrNgU5q3OnIhnWeU7 leTryzLivgc9J49es/E39EOa0c0i0LE0mzIHrAO7Fg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIFW+7euo0AWNhdV5VTLDaDghf8PvVoxdLJe9F9MQH50x2PY3DaJ9YflHOdzGovIfQruEavAXQA7Y40c35vvgw= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:3334:: with SMTP id f49-v6mr1949379otc.380.1528995036492; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:50:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: hallam@gmail.com Received: by 2002:a9d:3a74:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:50:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Phillip Hallam-Baker Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 12:50:35 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ZqgT1Wuwhk0tHw-zRh2JN5AgYr4 Message-ID: To: dispatch@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000003774f056e9ce6e5" Archived-At: Subject: [dispatch] Web Service Discovery X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 16:50:40 -0000 --00000000000003774f056e9ce6e5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Following our last meeting, I have put together a draft describing the approach I am using to perform Web Service Discovery which I would like to discuss in Montreal https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hallambaker-web-service-discovery/ My approach is largely constrained by existing RFCs and 'common sense' but these are not enough to remove all variability in approaches. The goal here is to enable discovery of Web Services by means of a compact account identifier in the form users are used to using. That is alice@example.com. I am aware of previous work in this space. In particular the original OpenID specification that tried to tell people http://example.com/alice was an account identifier, XRI, etc. and a large number of 'open' protocols with proprietary infrastructures. So there are now multiple services using the same 'open protocol' but the users can't talk to each other because the user names don't provide for federation. In my view, none of those are as good as the approach established in rfc822 and descendants which users are already familiar with. It will be noted that the approach does allow for negotiating across presentation protocols. For example, http vs QUIC or COAP. I have not gone down that rabbit hole at this time. I would like to move forward with this document either as an independent draft or as a Working Group. Which is appropriate really depends on whether there is an interest in defining additional discovery description keys to the three specified in the documentation. The keys I have defined are narrowly focused and the scope for variation is limited to deciding whether we should use abbreviations for the key names or not. --00000000000003774f056e9ce6e5 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Following our last meeting, I= have put together a draft describing the approach I am using to perform We= b Service Discovery which I would like to discuss in Montreal

http= s://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hallambaker-web-service-discovery/

My approach is largely constrained by existing RFCs and 'common sense&= #39; but these are not enough to remove all variability in approaches.

The go= al here is to enable discovery of Web Services by means of a compact accoun= t identifier in the form users are used to using. That is alice@example.com.


I am aware of previous work in this space. In particular the original = OpenID specification that tried to tell people http://example.com/alice was an account identifier, XRI, etc. = and a large number of 'open' protocols with proprietary infrastruct= ures. So there are now multiple services using the same 'open protocol&= #39; but the users can't talk to each other because the user names don&= #39;t provide for federation.

<= div class=3D"gmail_default">In my view, none of those are as good as the ap= proach established in rfc822 and descendants which users are already famili= ar with.



I would like to move forward with= this document either as an independent draft or as a Working Group. Which = is appropriate really depends on whether there is an interest in defining a= dditional discovery description keys to the three specified in the document= ation. The keys I have defined are narrowly focused and the scope for varia= tion is limited to deciding whether we should use abbreviations for the key= names or not.
--00000000000003774f056e9ce6e5--