Re: BIND issue 3.1_uuids (action item)

Sounds good to me.

Cheers,
Geoff

Julian wrote on 01/14/2005 11:09:23 AM:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> see 
> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-bind-latest.
> html#rfc.issue.3.1_uuids>:
> 
> "Action item: if draft-mealling-uuid-urn gets accepted in time, consider 

> referencing it and using urn:uuid URIs instead of opaquelocktoken URIs. 
> See IETF I-D Tracker."
> 
> In fact, the draft *has* been approved (see 
> 
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=9352
> >) 
> and now is in the RFC Editor's publication queue: 
> <http://rfc-editor.org/queue.html#mealling-uuid-urn>.
> 
> Thus, I'd propose to
> 
> a) to mention urn:uuid URIs in the description of DAV:resource-id,
> b) to use them in examples and
> c) add an informative reference to draft-mealling-uuid-urn
> 
> Feedback appreciated, Julian
> 
> 
> -- 
> <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
>