I'm no expert on URLs (someone could dig up the standard) but it was my
understanding that the // indicated a location on the network, but that that
URLs that do not contain a location (file: , mailto: , news:) are
still completely within the standard.

a little later:

The RFC is 1738 - http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt?number=1738 (the URL of
URLs!)

The general format is just:

<scheme>:<scheme-specific-part>

With scheme:

//<user>:<password>@<host>:<port>/<url-path>

being used for schemes that "involve the direct use of an IP-based protocol to
a specified host on the Internet."

Another part of note is this:

   "Many URL schemes reserve certain characters for a special meaning:
   their appearance in the scheme-specific part of the URL has a
   designated semantics. If the character corresponding to an octet is
   reserved in a scheme, the octet must be encoded.  The characters ";",
   "/", "?", ":", "@", "=" and "&" are the characters which may be
   reserved for special meaning within a scheme. No other characters may
   be reserved within a scheme."

Freenet's URL scheme will need to separate key/request type from the key value,
and also, in the case of keys like CHKs and SVKs, separate the the hash value
from the decryption key. Also, urls allow only for a couple of chars (alphabet,
number, and a handful more), other characters (since anything is allowed in a
KHK) have to be encoded.

Also:

   "A new scheme may be introduced by defining a mapping onto a
   conforming URL syntax, using a new prefix. URLs for experimental
   schemes may be used by mutual agreement between parties. Scheme names
   starting with the characters "x-" are reserved for experimental
   purposes.

   The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) will maintain a
   registry of URL schemes. Any submission of a new URL scheme must
   include a definition of an algorithm for accessing of resources
   within that scheme and the syntax for representing such a scheme.

   URL schemes must have demonstrable utility and operability.  One way
   to provide such a demonstration is via a gateway which provides
   objects in the new scheme for clients using an existing protocol.  If
   the new scheme does not locate resources that are data objects, the
   properties of names in the new space must be clearly defined.

   New schemes should try to follow the same syntactic conventions of
   existing schemes, where appropriate.  It is likewise recommended
   that, where a protocol allows for retrieval by URL, that the client
   software have provision for being configured to use specific gateway
   locators for indirect access through new naming schemes."

This is IANA page about currently accepted URL schemes, I think

ftp://www.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/url-schemes

Further digging also shows that RFC2396
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt?number=2396 actually replaces 1738, but it
says the same thing more or less, though it babels on about relative references
and fragments and queries a lot.

On Sun, 07 May 2000, Ian Clarke wrote:
> Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> > 
> > Where did you get that URL format from? It is most certainly not correct, if
> > Freenet ever has a URL format, it will not include the server, since that 
> > is a
> > setting (URLs for mail and usenet do not include the address of the SMTP or 
> > NNTP server, for example).
> 
> This is correct - in fact I question whether URLs are appropriate for
> Freenet keys at all since (and correct me if I am wrong) they generally
> imply an indication of the "location" of the information, which is not
> appropriate for Freenet (mailto:xxx style stuff might be an exception -
> but are they actually URLs or just a kludge?).  I know they fit nicely
> into the web-browser paradigm but if we are going to use something in
> the URL-*style* then perhaps we should use a different term for them to
> avoid confusion.
> 
> > Personally, I preferred the "free:" suggestion for the url name.
> 
> I am pretty agnostic about this although it would make a nice point!
> 
> Ian.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Freenet-dev mailing list
> Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
-- 

Oskar Sandberg

md98-osa at nada.kth.se

#!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj
$/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1
lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/)

_______________________________________________
Freenet-dev mailing list
Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev

Reply via email to