headers
Martin Duerst | 27 Oct 2006 04:43
Picon
Gravatar

informal last call for draft-duerst-archived-at-06


Dear email experts,

I have submitted a new version of draft-duerst-archived-at, which
is now available at
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-duerst-archived-at-06.txt
This turned out to be only a minor update from the -05 version
(which incorporated lots of your comments), and so I plan to
submit it to the IESG for further processing soon, unless any
serious problems are found.

Any comments are therefore highly appreciated in the next two weeks.
Please make sure to cc: me personally, as I'm not subscribed to this
list.

With kind regards,     Martin.

P.S.: I hope we can avoid previous discussions about whether this
      is useful. I know quite a few people who think it's absolutely
      useless, but I also know a lot of people who use it daily to
      simplify their work. I hope we simply can agree that mileage
      varies on this point.

#-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-#-#  http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp       mailto:duerst <at> it.aoyama.ac.jp
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Frank Ellermann | 27 Oct 2006 16:19
Picon
Picon

Re: informal last call for draft-duerst-archived-at-06


Martin Duerst wrote:

> I plan to submit it to the IESG for further processing soon, unless
> any serious problems are found.

=== 1st issue ===
It's not exactly serious, but IMO you just can't register anything X-...

You can explain what it was, and why anybody using it should upgrade
to Archived-At, but you can't register X-Archived-At.  STD 11 / RFC 822
says X-... is user territory.

Just delete section 5.2, integrating 5.1 into 5.  If you want to add
another example (news usage without Message-ID) you could take this:

| Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.ietf.message-headers:30
| Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.message-headers/30>

But that's of course only "lillyguilding", in other words it's almost
ready, minus the X-... nit.

=== 2nd point ===
I'm not sure about section 2.4, Archived-At as URI will do for some
years:  IRI-producers can as well produce URIs, but "old" Archived-At
consuments like my tools support only some URI schemes, no "raw" IRIs.

Besides raw UTF-8 in message headers is strictly impossible, and the
planned EAI experiment might still limit its scope to local parts in
addresses (excluding Message-IDs).
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |

Gmane