idnits 2.17.1 draft-hoffman-scheme-reg-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** It looks like you're using RFC 3978 boilerplate. You should update this to the boilerplate described in the IETF Trust License Policy document (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info), which is required now. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.1.a on line 16. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.5 on line 178. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 1 on line 155. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 2 on line 162. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 3 on line 168. ** The document seems to lack an RFC 3978 Section 5.1 IPR Disclosure Acknowledgement. ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line, instead of the newer IETF Trust Copyright according to RFC 4748. ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.5 Disclaimer, instead of the newer disclaimer which includes the IETF Trust according to RFC 4748. ** The document uses RFC 3667 boilerplate or RFC 3978-like boilerplate instead of verbatim RFC 3978 boilerplate. After 6 May 2005, submission of drafts without verbatim RFC 3978 boilerplate is not accepted. The following non-3978 patterns matched text found in the document. That text should be removed or replaced: This document is an Internet-Draft and is subject to all provisions of Section 3 of RFC 3667. By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (October 15, 2004) is 7125 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2717 (Obsoleted by RFC 4395) Summary: 6 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 7 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group P. Hoffman 3 Internet-Draft VPN Consortium 4 Expires: April 15, 2005 October 15, 2004 6 Revised Registration Procedures for URL Scheme Names 7 draft-hoffman-scheme-reg-00.txt 9 Status of this Memo 11 This document is an Internet-Draft and is subject to all provisions 12 of section 3 of RFC 3667. By submitting this Internet-Draft, each 13 author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of 14 which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of 15 which he or she become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with 16 RFC 3668. 18 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 19 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 20 other groups may also distribute working documents as 21 Internet-Drafts. 23 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 24 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 25 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 26 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 28 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 29 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 31 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 32 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 34 This Internet-Draft will expire on April 15, 2005. 36 Copyright Notice 38 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). 40 Abstract 42 This document revises the registration procedures given in RFC 2717 43 based on five years of experience. It simplifies the requirements 44 for getting a scheme listed by IANA by removing the technical review 45 and allowing multiple registrants to share a scheme name. 47 1. Introduction 49 RFC 2717 [RFC2717] describes the current mechanism for registering 50 new URL schemes. There is widespread dissatisfaction in the Internet 51 community with these procedures, which has led to many people simply 52 ignoring them and using unregistered schemes in many widely-deployed 53 applications. 55 This document revises the procedures in RFC 2717 to make registration 56 much simpler and more definitive, at a cost of allowing some schemes 57 to have multiple registrations. The basic structure of the new 58 procedure is: 60 o Scheme names in the registry can have multiple entries for the 61 name. There is no "first come, first served" restriction on a 62 name. 63 o After an RFC that registers a scheme name is published, the RFC is 64 entered into the registry and the name is then closed to 65 additional entries. 66 o There is no technical review of registrations, only a minor 67 secretarial review (and a check whether or not the name's 68 registration is already closed). 69 o Schemes in the current IANA registry are closed to new 70 registrations. 72 2. Procedure for Registering 74 The registrant should first check the IANA scheme name registry to 75 see whether or not there is already an entry for the name desired 76 and, if so, whether the name's registration is closed. If it is not 77 closed (or there is no entry under the name yet), the registrant may 78 register the name by submitting the template shown here to IANA. 80 Upon receipt of the filled-in template, IANA: 82 1. Checks the submission for completeness. 83 2. Checks the current registry for an entry of that name. If such a 84 registry exists, checks that the registry is not closed. If it 85 is closed, IANA rejects the registration request. 86 3. Checks the URL given in the request, makes sure it is alive, and 87 checks that it generally describes the URL scheme being 88 registered. 89 4. [[ Possibly more here. ]] 90 5. Fills in the registry. 92 2.1 Registration Template 94 [[ Use same template as RFC 2717, but add "URL of document more 95 completely describing the scheme". ]] 97 2.2 Registering from RFCs 99 [[ Needs to be filled in. Similar to steps as above, but with the 100 addition of marking the name's registry as "closed" after entering 101 the new entry. ]] 103 3. IANA Considerations 105 Clearly, this whole document is about IANA considerations. 107 3.1 Converting the current registry to the new format 109 [[ Stuff here about adding URLs. ]] 111 [[ Adding an indicator for each current name that the name is closed 112 because all current names start off closed. ]] 114 3.2 Registering new names 116 [[ How to start a new name entry ]] 118 3.3 Adding additional registrations to existing names 120 [[ Checking that the name is actually open ]] 122 3.4 Registering names from RFCs 124 [[ Making it the last entry; closing out the name ]] 126 4. Security Considerations 128 There are no known security issues with the new registration 129 mechanism. 131 5 Normative References 133 [RFC2717] Petke, R. and I. King, "Registration Procedures for URL 134 Scheme Names", BCP 35, RFC 2717, November 1999. 136 Author's Address 138 Paul Hoffman 139 VPN Consortium 140 127 Segre Place 141 Santa Cruz, CA 95060 142 US 144 EMail: paul.hoffman@vpnc.org 146 Intellectual Property Statement 148 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 149 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to 150 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 151 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 152 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has 153 made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information 154 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be 155 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. 157 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any 158 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an 159 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of 160 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this 161 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at 162 http://www.ietf.org/ipr. 164 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 165 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 166 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement 167 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at 168 ietf-ipr@ietf.org. 170 Disclaimer of Validity 172 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an 173 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS 174 OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET 175 ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, 176 INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE 177 INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED 178 WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 180 Copyright Statement 182 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject 183 to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and 184 except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. 186 Acknowledgment 188 Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the 189 Internet Society.