![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
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
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.