# Re: difficuties with new internet draft (ietf-uri-yaurn-00)

Ronald E. Daniel (rdaniel@acl.lanl.gov)
Tue, 21 Mar 1995 14:10:16 -0700

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: difficuties with new internet draft (ietf-uri-yaurn-00)"
- Previous message: Clifford Lynch: "difficuties with new internet draft (ietf-uri-yaurn-00)"
- Maybe in reply to: Clifford Lynch: "difficuties with new internet draft (ietf-uri-yaurn-00)"
- Next in thread: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: difficuties with new internet draft (ietf-uri-yaurn-00)"

    From: "Ronald E. Daniel" <rdaniel@acl.lanl.gov>

    Message-Id: <9503211410.ZM18315@idaknow.acl.lanl.gov>

    Date: Tue, 21 Mar 1995 14:10:16 -0700

    In-Reply-To: clifford.lynch@ucop.edu (Clifford Lynch)

    To: clifford.lynch@ucop.edu (Clifford Lynch)

    Subject: Re: difficuties with  new internet draft (ietf-uri-yaurn-00)

Hi Cliff,

Thanks for the fast response to the draft.

> I believe that this draft should be broken into at least 2
> and more probably 3 draft RFCs.

Paul and I will need to agree on this, but I have no strong objection to
splitting the draft as you describe. I think it is nice to have things
together so that people can implement from fewer documents, but I can
certainly see the logic of your position.

> I think that we need to look
> carefully at what in the proposed syntax is really generic URN sytnax and
> what is substructure that is specific to the proposed DNS scheme.

In conversations with Dan LaLiberte and Michael Shapiro about the
path scheme, they have voiced similar concerns. This was something
I have thought about a bit more since then. I really want to
talk with Roy Fielding and Peter Deutsch to get some contrasting views
on the syntax before we go off and write the first of the 3 drafts that
would replace this one.

> Since as I understand it this is on the agenda for the upcoming IETF
> meeting, I would strongly urge the authors to try to separate out the
> issues into separate documents; I think that this will lead to a much
> better-focused discussion and more rapid progress.

During the presentation I can try to present the three aspects
seperately. It may also be possible to try and split the Q&A session
into parts - but that is Larry's call to make. I don't think that we
will have revised documents by that time. For one thing, I doubt that
I will get a chance for much feedback from Roy and Peter before then.
For the second - I would like to collect more comments on the existing
draft before updating it or replacing it.

    --
    Ron Daniel Jr.                email: rdaniel@acl.lanl.gov
    Advanced Computing Lab        voice: (505) 665-0597
    MS B-287  TA-3  Bldg. 2011      fax: (505) 665-4939
    Los Alamos National Lab        http://www.acl.lanl.gov/~rdaniel/
    Los Alamos, NM,  87545    tautology: "Conformity is very popular"

- Next message: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: difficuties with new internet draft (ietf-uri-yaurn-00)"
- Previous message: Clifford Lynch: "difficuties with new internet draft (ietf-uri-yaurn-00)"
- Maybe in reply to: Clifford Lynch: "difficuties with new internet draft (ietf-uri-yaurn-00)"
- Next in thread: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: difficuties with new internet draft (ietf-uri-yaurn-00)"