- From: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
- Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 21:42:26 +0200
- To: uri@w3.org
Next question, RFC 3405 introduced uri.arpa domains with NAPTRs for various schemes. My nslookup is too old for such tricks, but with an online "dig" I found: http://vweb.nass.com.au/cgi-bin/dnslookup?data=urn.uri.arpa http://vweb.nass.com.au/cgi-bin/dnslookup?data=ftp.uri.arpa http://vweb.nass.com.au/cgi-bin/dnslookup?data=http.uri.arpa http://vweb.nass.com.au/cgi-bin/dnslookup?data=mailto.uri.arpa My regexp knowledge is somewhat limited, is the pattern for ftp and http really correct ? A colon in <userinfo> doesn't terminate an <authority>, the wanted part is the <host> without optional <port> behind an optional <userinfo>. The pattern for mailto: is a very simple variant of 2368(bis), it allows exactly one mailbox without header, or in other words, where are the "?" and the "," terminating an optional first mailbox ? Let alone stuff like a <route-addr> in RFC 822, but Paul already said here that this was probably an error, and 2368bis reduced it to an <addr-spec> list. 2368bis -03 uses %2C as separator, what's wrong with a comma ? Anyway, what I really wanted to ask: Should nntp get a new nntp.uri.arpa NAPTR as proposed in BCP 65 ? Frank
Received on Friday, 27 October 2006 19:56:54 UTC