Farrell
Cc: Graham Klyne; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-farrell-decade-ni-07.txt (Naming Things with
Hashes) to Proposed Standard
Hello Stephen,
On 2012/06/26 20:26, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Hi again Martin,
On 06/26/2012 12:11 PM, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
So the question is really
Hello Stephen,
On 2012/06/26 20:26, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Hi again Martin,
On 06/26/2012 12:11 PM, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
So the question is really, what's the use case, and what's just a
consequence of that use case. If confirmation of already available
resources (e.g. like a fingerprint)
Hi Martin,
On 07/02/2012 12:07 PM, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
Hello Stephen,
On 2012/06/26 20:26, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Hi again Martin,
On 06/26/2012 12:11 PM, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
So the question is really, what's the use case, and what's just a
consequence of that use case. If
Hello Stephen,
On 2012/06/25 21:05, Stephen Farrell wrote:
On 06/25/2012 11:35 AM, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
Unfortunately, what I find is the following:
The justification for using a URI scheme for this is that that might
help a user agent for the speaker to better display the value, or
Hi again Martin,
On 06/26/2012 12:11 PM, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
So the question is really, what's the use case, and what's just a
consequence of that use case. If confirmation of already available
resources (e.g. like a fingerprint) is the (main?) use case, and the
greater weight on
Hi Stephen,
At 14:20 22-06-2012, Stephen Farrell wrote:
The issues raised but not so far obviously resolved on the
list were I think:
1) inclusion of content type
2) nih as a URI scheme or not
[snip]
For (2) we've left nih in as a URI scheme in this version.
We're still in favour of keeping
Hello Stephen, others,
On 2012/06/23 6:20, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Hi All,
I went back through the IETF LC comments and think that we've
resolved them all on the list and have the changes in this
version [1] of the draft, with the possible exception of those
below.
The issues raised but not
Hi Martin,
On 06/25/2012 11:35 AM, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
Hello Stephen, others,
On 2012/06/23 6:20, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Hi All,
I went back through the IETF LC comments and think that we've
resolved them all on the list and have the changes in this
version [1] of the draft, with
Hi All,
I went back through the IETF LC comments and think that we've
resolved them all on the list and have the changes in this
version [1] of the draft, with the possible exception of those
below.
The issues raised but not so far obviously resolved on the
list were I think:
1) inclusion of
Having never heard of this proposal before, I found the concept
interesting, but the exposition in the draft was difficult to grasp in
certain places. I believe that it is because the text assumes that
the reader already knows the underlying theory of what the process is
intended to accomplish.
Hi Dale,
On 06/12/2012 03:04 PM, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote:
Having never heard of this proposal before, I found the concept
interesting, but the exposition in the draft was difficult to grasp in
certain places. I believe that it is because the text assumes that
the reader already knows
From: Stephen Farrell [stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie]
For example, in section 3, the syntax of the ni URI scheme is
spelled out with admirable clarity and exactness, including:
Digest Value [Required] The digest value MUST be encoded using the
base64url [RFC4648] encoding.
At 07:18 04-06-2012, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Naming Things with Hashes'
draft-farrell-decade-ni-07.txt as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final
On 06/11/2012 01:30 PM, SM wrote:
At 07:18 04-06-2012, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Naming Things with Hashes'
draft-farrell-decade-ni-07.txt as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in
14 matches
Mail list logo
