Message-Id: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 20:02:28 -0700 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Paul Hoffman) Subject: finger, again Cc: email@example.com I propose the following: ==================== The "finger" URL has the form: finger://host[:port][/<request>] The <request> must conform with the RFC 1288 request format. A finger client could simply send the <request> to the host designated in the first part of the URL at the specified port after decoding any escaped characters. ==================== I believe that the "host" is the host to which the request is *first* sent. Otherwise, we are getting into routing issues, which I think are inappropriate for URL schemes. Also, it is likely that >99% of the finger URLs we see will be simply "finger://host/user" or "finger://host". Let's not burden the spec with how to do the oddball @host1@host2 stuff. Examples finger://space.mit.edu/nasanews finger://firstname.lastname@example.org finger://host1.bigstate.edu/%2FW%20someuser For the security part, I would add: As explained in RFC 1738, URLs that use non-standard port numbers pose a potential security risk for users of those URLs. If a port other than 79 is specified in a finger URL, the finger client might warn the user or reject the URL altogether. How does this sound to everyone?