1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <rick.wesson@iidf.org>) id 1RbfgE-0005Xd-UV
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 16 Dec 2011 21:51:02 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from mail-vw0-f47.google.com ([209.85.212.47])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1RbfgB-0006nv-P0
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 16 Dec 2011 21:51:02 +0000
Received: by vbbfc21 with SMTP id fc21so4019603vbb.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 16 Dec 2011 13:50:54 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.89.71 with SMTP id bm7mr7510753vdb.41.1324072254120; Fri,
16 Dec 2011 13:50:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.52.37.80 with HTTP; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 13:50:54 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <201112162054.51039.andyparkins@gmail.com>
References: <1323731781.42953.YahooMailClassic@web120920.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
<201112161710.15165.andyparkins@gmail.com>
<CAJ1JLts8JQ2J=DqJTD76gq2KB02ycqqeJjwaDyY2tPX8SJwvVA@mail.gmail.com>
<201112162054.51039.andyparkins@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 13:50:54 -0800
Message-ID: <CAJ1JLtv+Q-+tV+jSWRzK=jH0t2Fug=89KJymc2OC=+w01iRQ6w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Rick Wesson <rick@support-intelligence.com>
To: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
0.1 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1RbfgB-0006nv-P0
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: [BIP 15] Aliases
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 21:51:03 -0000
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com> wrot=
e:
[snip]
>
> You've been unfair, the equivalent of your "user@authority.tld" is
> "https://authority.tld/user" or "https://user.authority.tld/" or
> "https://google.com/bitcoin/user" or any of an infinite number of other
> variations that _I_ as the mapper get to choose rather than whoever wrote
> the BIP; all of which are arguably no less "elegant" than that simple ema=
il.
>
> There is no equivalent in the other direction though. =A0For someone who
> want's to supply the TX to their mapping server... where does it go in
> "user@authority.tld"?
actually there are many differences. Specifying a standard using a
HTTP(s) transport for a look-up isn't something that has been done in
the PATH portion of the URI and that I was pointing out that there is
*NO* RFC that specifies such for a look-up provide the inverse of many
protocol specifications that did *not* choose that methodology.
What has happened is various schemes are specified, developed and
deployed. I am sure you are familure with many. sip:// ftp:// etc://
many are described at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/URI_scheme
NAPTR records (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAPTR_record) are
another area that deserves research for those that desire URI schemes.
Understand that I am mearly advocating that as a group this work be
done in standards development process, and that IBANN is one such
effort.
-rick
|
