# Re: Revised Internet-Draft: finger URL

Jared_Rhine@hmc.edu
Sun, 26 Feb 1995 16:05:05 -0500

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Paul Hoffman: "Re: Revised Internet-Draft: finger URL"
- Previous message: Larry Masinter: "Re: Revised Internet-Draft: finger URL"
- Maybe in reply to: Jared_Rhine@hmc.edu: "Revised Internet-Draft: finger URL"
- Next in thread: Paul Hoffman: "Re: Revised Internet-Draft: finger URL"

    Date: Sun, 26 Feb 1995 16:05:05 -0500

    Message-Id: <199502262105.QAA13856@aslan.math.hmc.edu>

    From: Jared_Rhine@hmc.edu

    To: ietf-lists@proper.com (Paul Hoffman)

    Subject: Re: Revised Internet-Draft: finger URL

LM == Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
PH == Paul Hoffman <ietf-lists@proper.com>

LM> Sorry for weighing in late on this, but my personal opinion after some
LM> consideration is that
LM>
LM> finger://host1.bigstate.edu/someuser
LM>
LM> is preferable to finger:someuser@host1.bigstate.edu

PH> - How to allow
PH> finger:user@usershost@host1@host2

Is this not covered by <URL:finger://host2/user@usershost@host1>? (Assuming
I unwrapped your example correctly.)

PH> - How to allow "/W".

Similarly, is this not <URL:finger://host/%2fWuser>?

PH> Also, I would like to see discussion about allowing host:port in this
PH> syntax. Should it be allowed, even though RFC 1288 says only serve on
PH> port 79?

I support not allowing a port specification for the finger scheme.

    --
    Jared_Rhine@hmc.edu | Harvey Mudd College | http://www.hmc.edu/~jared/home.html

    "A black hole is where God is dividing by zero."
            -- attributed to Roger Smith

- Next message: Paul Hoffman: "Re: Revised Internet-Draft: finger URL"
- Previous message: Larry Masinter: "Re: Revised Internet-Draft: finger URL"
- Maybe in reply to: Jared_Rhine@hmc.edu: "Revised Internet-Draft: finger URL"
- Next in thread: Paul Hoffman: "Re: Revised Internet-Draft: finger URL"