Frank Ellermann | 27 Oct 21:42
Picon
Picon

3405 URI NAPTR (BCP 65)


Next question, RFC 3405 introduced uri.arpa domains with NAPTRs for various
schemes.  My nslookup is too old for such tricks, but with an online "dig"
I found:

http://vweb.nass.com.au/cgi-bin/dnslookup?data=urn.uri.arpa
http://vweb.nass.com.au/cgi-bin/dnslookup?data=ftp.uri.arpa
http://vweb.nass.com.au/cgi-bin/dnslookup?data=http.uri.arpa
http://vweb.nass.com.au/cgi-bin/dnslookup?data=mailto.uri.arpa

My regexp knowledge is somewhat limited, is the pattern for ftp and http
really correct ?  A colon in <userinfo> doesn't terminate an <authority>,
the wanted part is the <host> without optional <port> behind an optional
<userinfo>.

The pattern for mailto: is a very simple variant of 2368(bis), it allows
exactly one mailbox without header, or in other words, where are the "?"
and the "," terminating an optional first mailbox ?  Let alone stuff
like a <route-addr> in RFC 822, but Paul already said here that this was
probably an error, and 2368bis reduced it to an <addr-spec> list.

2368bis -03 uses %2C as separator, what's wrong with a comma ?  Anyway,
what I really wanted to ask:  Should nntp get a new nntp.uri.arpa NAPTR
as proposed in BCP 65 ?

Frank


Gmane