W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > March 2006

RE: [dix] on the dix: URI scheme for DIX/SXIP

From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip <pbaker@verisign.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 14:25:12 -0800
Message-ID: <198A730C2044DE4A96749D13E167AD3797D6B2@MOU1WNEXMB04.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
To: "Digital Identity Exchange" <dix@ietf.org>, "John Merrells" <merrells@sxip.com>, "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Cc: <uri@w3.org>
I disagree. I think that it is a bad idea to tie this particular URL to one
protocol. http:// urls are a pain, it would have been better to have web://
URLs that could map onto HTTP1.x, HTTP-NG, DIME, etc. 

I really don't like the idea of the dixs.org hack here. People should have a
first class URL.

I would prefer something like UN:<domain>:<role> or something like it. Then
that could map from the identifier to SAML, WS-*, DIX...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Connolly [mailto:connolly@w3.org] 
> Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 4:30 PM
> To: John Merrells; Lisa Dusseault
> Cc: dix@ietf.org; uri@w3.org
> Subject: [dix] on the dix: URI scheme for DIX/SXIP
> I learned at a W3C authorization workshop this week
>    http://www.w3.org/2005/Security/usability-ws/program
> that there's a SXIP/DIX BOF at the IETF next week.
>    http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/06mar/agenda/dix.html
> I'm pretty excited about DIX/SXIP and related web-like 
> authorization mechanisms, but I don't think I can swing the 
> trip to Dallas.
> Section 7 of http://dixs.org/index.php/Draft-merrells-dix-01.txt
> says "This document has no IANA Actions." but section 3.2.6. 
> DIX URI Namespace introduces a new URI scheme.
> Introducing a new URI scheme just for DIX is not a good use 
> of scarce community resources; let's not do the DAV: thing again.
> Instead of
>    dix:/homesite
> just use something like
>    http://dixs.org/terms#homesite
> There are some IANA considerations around dixs.org; IANA 
> should make sure that name is reserved for this purpose in 
> perpetuity if this spec is adopted. Or the DIX profile should 
> use iana.org or ietf.org .
> (There's a BCP that says to use urn:ietf , but I recommend 
> against that; I intend to renew the internet draft that 
> argues for http/dns rather than urn:ietf: .)
> The draft charter also doesn't say that DIX is introducing a 
> new URI scheme.
>    http://dixs.org/index.php/DIX_Charter
> Please add something to the charter about getting review for the dix: 
> scheme.
> --
> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
> _______________________________________________
> dix mailing list
> dix@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dix

Received on Saturday, 18 March 2006 22:26:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:10 UTC