Comments for Mason Lee http://masonlee.org home page and weblog Mon, 02 Nov 2009 02:36:58 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on RssCloud Atom Extension by Matt Terenzio http://masonlee.org/2009/09/11/rsscloud-atom-extension/#comment-244 Matt Terenzio Mon, 02 Nov 2009 02:36:58 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=127#comment-244 Hmm, didn't see this until Dave just linked to it. Seems IP issue fix underway with the advent of the domain parameter. I guess you mean registerprocedure should be optional since it is empty on HTTP Post. Makes sense. No big deal. lastly, I believe there has been talk on PSHB list about the order of the hub elements in the document actually implicitly stating their priority. What do you think of that? Hmm, didn’t see this until Dave just linked to it.

Seems IP issue fix underway with the advent of the domain parameter.

I guess you mean registerprocedure should be optional since it is empty on HTTP Post. Makes sense. No big deal.

lastly, I believe there has been talk on PSHB list about the order of the hub elements in the document actually implicitly stating their priority.

What do you think of that?

]]> Comment on Is the web sticky enough? by Mason Lee http://masonlee.org/2009/08/21/is-the-web-sticky-enough/#comment-226 Mason Lee Wed, 07 Oct 2009 00:56:16 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=91#comment-226 Just found this briefing paper on the same topic: http://www.digitalpreservationeurope.eu/publications/briefs/persistent_identifiers.pdf Just found this briefing paper on the same topic:
http://www.digitalpreservationeurope.eu/publications/briefs/persistent_identifiers.pdf

]]> Comment on RssCloud Atom Extension by Mason Lee http://masonlee.org/2009/09/11/rsscloud-atom-extension/#comment-212 Mason Lee Sun, 13 Sep 2009 08:13:13 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=127#comment-212 Hi, Joseph. Thanks for looking it over. (And thanks for RssCloudifying my wordpress blog!) I haven't yet heard anyone suggest improvements to rssCloud that would affect this part of the spec, but actually I can think of two: 1. The "registerProcedure" attribute should be optional. 2. If multiple cloud elements are allowed for a single feed, each could have an optional "priority" int attribute to say, "This one is primary, this one is backup." 10, 20, 30, etc. Neither seem strictly necessary though. Not as important as fixing the "same-IP" issue, which I was happy to hear on the BadHair.us podcast Dave agrees is worth consideration. Hi, Joseph. Thanks for looking it over. (And thanks for RssCloudifying my wordpress blog!)

I haven’t yet heard anyone suggest improvements to rssCloud that would affect this part of the spec, but actually I can think of two:

1. The “registerProcedure” attribute should be optional.
2. If multiple cloud elements are allowed for a single feed, each could have an optional “priority” int attribute to say, “This one is primary, this one is backup.” 10, 20, 30, etc.

Neither seem strictly necessary though. Not as important as fixing the “same-IP” issue, which I was happy to hear on the BadHair.us podcast Dave agrees is worth consideration.

]]> Comment on RssCloud Atom Extension by Joseph Scott http://masonlee.org/2009/09/11/rsscloud-atom-extension/#comment-211 Joseph Scott Sat, 12 Sep 2009 22:57:05 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=127#comment-211 I think this looks like a reasonable approach to adding rssCloud support to Atom. Might be worth waiting to move forward on this until any tweaks/adjustments to the original rssCloud details are made. Once folks are confident that the issues have been addressed your proposed extension could be updated and reviewed in more detail. I think this looks like a reasonable approach to adding rssCloud support to Atom. Might be worth waiting to move forward on this until any tweaks/adjustments to the original rssCloud details are made. Once folks are confident that the issues have been addressed your proposed extension could be updated and reviewed in more detail.

]]> Comment on Thoughts on .Tel and WebFinger by Mason Lee http://masonlee.org/2009/08/20/thoughts-on-tel-and-webfinger/#comment-205 Mason Lee Wed, 26 Aug 2009 09:43:11 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=75#comment-205 HTTPS does have certificate authorities to mitigate DNS-spoofing, and the UIs for presenting CA-verified identities are getting pretty good, as can be seen, for example, in recent Safari and Firefox releases. What is Telnic's position on rolling out DNSSEC for .tel? HTTPS does have certificate authorities to mitigate DNS-spoofing, and the UIs for presenting CA-verified identities are getting pretty good, as can be seen, for example, in recent Safari and Firefox releases.

What is Telnic’s position on rolling out DNSSEC for .tel?

]]> Comment on Is the web sticky enough? by Mason Lee http://masonlee.org/2009/08/21/is-the-web-sticky-enough/#comment-204 Mason Lee Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:13:09 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=91#comment-204 Textbook examples of Atom feed elements use GUIDs as IDs. The nice thing about these is you don't need a central authority to generate them, they are just probably unique. Here is a scheme for generating them and for representing them as URIs: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4122.txt RFC 4122 uses 128 bit IDs. Using 256-bits would get you almost enough IDs to assign one to every atom in the universe (Est. 10^80). (Did God use 256-bit IDs and run out of space?) How resource IDs fit in with versioning is an interesting question... Textbook examples of Atom feed elements use GUIDs as IDs. The nice thing about these is you don’t need a central authority to generate them, they are just probably unique. Here is a scheme for generating them and for representing them as URIs:

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4122.txt

RFC 4122 uses 128 bit IDs. Using 256-bits would get you almost enough IDs to assign one to every atom in the universe (Est. 10^80). (Did God use 256-bit IDs and run out of space?)

How resource IDs fit in with versioning is an interesting question…

]]> Comment on Is the web sticky enough? by Mason Lee http://masonlee.org/2009/08/21/is-the-web-sticky-enough/#comment-203 Mason Lee Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:05:20 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=91#comment-203 @plaggypig Thanks. I agree, the re-assignability of memorable names is important for some systems. An audit trail maintained at the DNS level wouldn't be able to tell you if path-named resources were reassigned. Can you explain more your thinking? @plaggypig Thanks. I agree, the re-assignability of memorable names is important for some systems. An audit trail maintained at the DNS level wouldn’t be able to tell you if path-named resources were reassigned. Can you explain more your thinking?

]]> Comment on Is the web sticky enough? by @plaggypig http://masonlee.org/2009/08/21/is-the-web-sticky-enough/#comment-202 @plaggypig Sat, 22 Aug 2009 04:50:02 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=91#comment-202 Individuals and businesses need to trade names that fit their particular interests and markets. A namespace that didn't cater for this demand would be a pretty unattractive one. I dare say if identifiers weren't reassignable then the process of registration would probably have to be qualified with checks that applicants are eligible to own any particular name, thereby raising the cost and reducing participation. But anyway, couldn't the problem be mitigated with an audit trail? The governing authority (TLD registry) could log a timestamp whenever a domain is transferred between registrants, and provide a list of these historical changes (via whois). I'm loving your blog Mason, this is a great discussion. Individuals and businesses need to trade names that fit their particular interests and markets. A namespace that didn’t cater for this demand would be a pretty unattractive one.

I dare say if identifiers weren’t reassignable then the process of registration would probably have to be qualified with checks that applicants are eligible to own any particular name, thereby raising the cost and reducing participation.

But anyway, couldn’t the problem be mitigated with an audit trail? The governing authority (TLD registry) could log a timestamp whenever a domain is transferred between registrants, and provide a list of these historical changes (via whois).

I’m loving your blog Mason, this is a great discussion.

]]> Comment on Thoughts on .Tel and WebFinger by Henri Asseily http://masonlee.org/2009/08/20/thoughts-on-tel-and-webfinger/#comment-201 Henri Asseily Fri, 21 Aug 2009 21:21:33 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=75#comment-201 Heh :) True, DNSSEC is something that the Internet as a whole needs. Note by the way that the XRD solution isn't at all immune to the DNS problem. Imagine the DNS being hijacked to change the XRD file location. The lower level you are for this stuff, the better. To me, the DNS is the best solution available, and it's there. It's just about having your domain (or even subdomain, but then you're again giving up your independence). Heh :) True, DNSSEC is something that the Internet as a whole needs.
Note by the way that the XRD solution isn’t at all immune to the DNS problem. Imagine the DNS being hijacked to change the XRD file location.

The lower level you are for this stuff, the better. To me, the DNS is the best solution available, and it’s there. It’s just about having your domain (or even subdomain, but then you’re again giving up your independence).

]]> Comment on Thoughts on .Tel and WebFinger by Mason Lee http://masonlee.org/2009/08/20/thoughts-on-tel-and-webfinger/#comment-200 Mason Lee Fri, 21 Aug 2009 21:01:17 +0000 http://masonlee.wordpress.com/?p=75#comment-200 Thanks very much, Henri. I hope you don't mind that I used your henri.tel card as an example :) I'm thinking about your work-around for the DNS security problem. Seems that for end-user applications, neither having a hard-coded third party name server, nor requiring additional UI for configuring one's own trusted nameserver is particularly desirable. I'm trying to think if there's a better solution. How about all geeks go on strike until DNSSEC is implemented? Thanks very much, Henri. I hope you don’t mind that I used your henri.tel card as an example :)

I’m thinking about your work-around for the DNS security problem. Seems that for end-user applications, neither having a hard-coded third party name server, nor requiring additional UI for configuring one’s own trusted nameserver is particularly desirable. I’m trying to think if there’s a better solution.

How about all geeks go on strike until DNSSEC is implemented?

]]>