- From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip <pbaker@verisign.com>
- Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 14:25:12 -0800
- To: "Digital Identity Exchange" <dix@ietf.org>, "John Merrells" <merrells@sxip.com>, "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@osafoundation.org>
- Cc: <uri@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <198A730C2044DE4A96749D13E167AD3797D6B2@MOU1WNEXMB04.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
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