[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: representing file pathnames

Chuck Lever wrote:
> On Aug 13, 2012, at 4:01 PM, Michael Ströder wrote:
>> Chuck Lever wrote:
>>> In order to use the NFS URL format, I think we would be compelled to
>>> correct RFC 2224, probably by issuing an RFC that supersedes it.
>> Why?
> My impression is that may be required by the IETF citation rules.  I could
> be wrong about that.
>> You could simply use the URL syntax defined in RFC 2224, section 1 (maybe
>> redefine it in your own draft) and ignore the WebNFS-related rest of RFC 2224
>> if it does not fit your needs. Maybe some things from section 6 could be also
>> considered. But personally I'm not familiar with NFS..
> We can implement whatever we like (and in fact we did just that in the
> current NSDB schema).  But there are certain constraints about what may be
> specified and referenced in a standards-track document.

IMHO it should be ok if you add a clear note about the non-relationship to WebNFS.

Maybe others with experience writing I-Ds and bringing them through the RFC
process can comment on this.

Ciao, Michael.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature