>>>>> Christian Grothoff <[email protected]> writes:

 > The current GNUnet URI scheme for files in GNUnet's file-sharing
 > subsystem is:

 > gnunet://fs/chk/HASH1.HASH2.SIZE

 > other GNUnet subsystems use other URIs starting also with
 > "gnunet://".

        My point is, that according to the specification [1], the part
        immediately after whatever:// is used (roughly) to name the
        particular server the content is stored at (and, optionally,
        provide access credentials.)  Consider, e. g.:

http://example.org/
nntp://[email protected]/comp.misc/

        OTOH, in the case of gnunet://fs/, what is this ‘fs’ server, and
        how do I contact ‘hostmaster@fs’ if it ever happens to host
        infringing content?

        Given that a CHK is just a “name” (derived from the content in a
        deterministic way), it clearly should be under the urn:
        hierarchy.  Consider also the urn:uuid: namespace [2], which
        also allows for content-derived (SHA-1, MD5) URI's.  Freenet
        doesn't use the //AUTHORITY form, either.

        (Also to note is that the English Wikipedia article [3] fails to
        mention what these abbreviations — CHK, SKS, KSK, Loc — stand
        for.  Neither does it mention the .gnunet TLD, BTW.  TODO.)

[1] urn:ietf:rfc:3986
    urn:ietf:std:66
    http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986
[2] urn:ietf:rfc:4122
    http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4122
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNUnet

[…]

 > Also, I don't see the need to combine the question of TLDs and URI
 > registrations,

        … Other than to allow one of the questions to be discarded in
        the course of discussion?  Honestly, I wasn't sure that both (or
        either) of these questions will be of interest to the
        subscribers.  I'm glad they are.

 > except that of course we (as in, the GNUnet project) _plan_ to do
 > register all of those that we use _eventually_.  Note that we do have
 > registrations for our default port and IPv6 multicast address
 > already, so we're certainly not totally ignorant of the processes
 > ;-).

        ACK, thanks.  (I didn't know about the IPv6 multicast address.)

-- 
FSF associate member #7257

_______________________________________________
p2p-hackers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers

Reply via email to