Kevin, > On Aug 10, 2015, at 3:54 PM, Darcy Kevin (FCA) <kevin.da...@fcagroup.com> > wrote: > > In retrospect, the definition of the “http” and “https” schemes (i.e. RFC > 7230) should have probably enumerated clearly which name registries were > acceptable for those schemes, so that the following language from RFC 7320 (a > BCP) could be invoked against any attempt by an app – Onion or anyone else -- > to inject their own unique brand of “specialness” into the interpretation of > the Authority component of their URIs
To echo Mark’s rebuttal of this statement, I would like to ask what benefit
would be served by doing so, please?
Thanks,
- alec
—
Alec Muffett
Security Infrastructure
Facebook Engineering
London
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
