Re: [Geopriv] The 's' in HELD

From: Eric Rescorla ^lt;>
Date: Wed Apr 30 2008 - 11:00:48 EDT

At Tue, 29 Apr 2008 20:40:42 -0500,
Thomson, Martin wrote:
> I missed this in the changes for -06. Please forgive my ignorance, but
> I wasn't there at -71 and it appears that only the conclusion was
> captured, not the rationale. The minutes focus on whether there should
> be a URI scheme or not, but make what seems (to me) to be a logical
> leap:
> Question: Does this HELD: scheme require TLS? Ans: Yes. Then
> it needs
> to be a HELDS: scheme.
> I don't believe that the letter 's' addresses "concerns over referential
> integrity" as stated by the held-06 change-log. So can anyone justify
> the above statement? Is there some IETF guideline I don't know of that
> states that URI schemes for protocols that use TLS have an extra 's'?

No, there's no rule, but it's pretty much the convention.

Geopriv mailing list
Received on Wed, 30 Apr 2008 08:00:48 -0700

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 30 2008 - 10:57:35 EDT