- From: Paul Hoffman <ietf-lists@proper.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 15:57:37 -0800
- To: <uri@bunyip.com>
At 12:38 PM 1/3/95, Tom Sears wrote: . . . >Would there also be a benefit from adding >a "private" scheme? . . . >Are there alternative >suggestions? Would such an addition be valuable to others? Why not just use an "x-" scheme name that you make up? That way, you don't have to worrry about leakage between two domains using "private" for two different things. Just use "x-cserve-1:". Note the "-1": you can have different versions of the scheme if you guess wrong the first time! --Paul Hoffman --Proper Publishing
Received on Tuesday, 3 January 1995 18:55:29 UTC