- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:01:34 -0400
- To: Steve Suehring <suehring@braingia.org>
- Cc: uri-review@ietf.org, uri@w3.org
I don't see a need to define a new URI scheme for this. You can just define an http URI prefix for this purpose, as described in http://dbooth.org/2006/urn2http/ Furthermore, as Graham Klyne suggested during a similar discussion earlier, "an HTTP URI can also retrieve a protocol [handler] implementation" http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2009Sep/0029.html This could dramatically improve the adoption rate of a new protocol. David Booth On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 11:01 -0500, Steve Suehring wrote: > Hello, > > Attached is a draft to be submitted to the IETF for URI scheme related > to secure shell (ssh). The draft was originally included in the secsh > Working Group which has since concluded. > > http://tools.ietf.org/wg/secsh/draft-ietf-secsh-scp-sftp-ssh-uri/ > > I recently received a request to pick this draft back up and the > co-author and I will be submitting it to the IETF under the Application > Area. > > Please provide feedback as appropriate. > > Thank you for your time. > > Steve Suehring > _______________________________________________ > Uri-review mailing list > Uri-review@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review -- David Booth, Ph.D. Cleveland Clinic (contractor) Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Cleveland Clinic.
Received on Monday, 12 October 2009 17:02:09 UTC