Home
Reading
Searching
Subscribe
Sponsors
Statistics
Posting
Contact
Spam
Lists
Links
About
Hosting
Filtering
Features Download
Marketing
Archives
FAQ
Blog
 
Gmane
From: Frank Ellermann <nobody <at> xyzzy.claranet.de>
Subject: 3405 URI NAPTR (BCP 65)
Newsgroups: gmane.org.w3c.uri
Date: Friday 27th October 2006 19:42:26 UTC (over 11 years ago)
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  doesn't terminate an ,
the wanted part is the  without optional  behind an optional
.

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  in RFC 822, but Paul already said here that this was
probably an error, and 2368bis reduced it to an  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
 
CD: 4ms