Russ,
I think the point is that the IESG should probably refer the doc to the
uri-review team to look for any red flags. Mistakes in URI specs are
common (speaking has one that has made some).
Eliot
On 9/30/09 9:51 PM, Russ Housley wrote:
Ted:
Just out of curiousity, why is this registering it as provisional,
rather than permanent scheme?
There is not a rsync protocol specification and URI scheme. The
protocol is widely deployed. In fact the IETF depends on it
everyday. This document is intended to provide a citable
specification for the URL scheme, but not the protocol. Without the
protocol specification, provisional seemed like the best choice based
on RFC 4395.
Russ
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf