Dear Colleagues, we are writing to take the following action before completing the registration for draft-spinosa-urn-lex-21 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-spinosa-urn-lex/). According to RFC 3405, we kindly ask you to add a NAPTR record related to the "lex" namespace to the uri.arpa domain. Thanks a lot for your collaboration best regards Pierluigi Spinosa Enrico Francesconi --- Enrico Francesconi Research Director IGSG - CNR [ex ITTIG - CNR] Institute of Legal Informatics and Judicial Systems National Research Council of Italy Via de' Barucci 20 50127 Florence Italy email: enrico.francesconi@cnr.it
On 1/5/24 2:09 PM, ENRICO FRANCESCONI via Register-uri wrote:
Dear Colleagues, we are writing to take the following action before completing the registration for draft-spinosa-urn-lex-21 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-spinosa-urn-lex/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-spinosa-urn-lex/>). According to RFC 3405, we kindly ask you to add a NAPTR record related to the "lex" namespace to the uri.arpa domain.
Ciao Enrico, I'm not an expert on the process for adding NAPTR records to the uri.arpa domain, but if I recall correctly (and based on a quick re-reading of RFC 3405), this domain is reserved for URI schemes. However, there is no `lex` URI scheme, so I don't immediately see how we could add `lex` to uri.arpa. On the other hand, your request to register a NAPTR record in the urn.arpa domain seems perfectly legitimate, since we've already added `lex` as a formal namespace ID in the URN namespaces registry. [1] Peter [1] https://www.iana.org/assignments/urn-namespaces/urn-namespaces.xhtml
Hi Peter, thanks for your feedback and for notifying us that "lex" namespace is already in the "urn.arpa" domain. As for the "uri.arpa" domain, actually it was a mistake of mine: my request would have been for the "urn.uri.arpa" domain, as requested by Amanda Baber (IANA Operations Manager) (see below). This need is also reported in the "lex" draft at Section 12 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-spinosa-urn-lex/ If I well understood, the update of the NAPTR records is to be reflected in the draft at Section 12 too (according to Eliot's request). If this is the case, we will update the draft accordingly and upload a new version soon. Best Enrico --- Enrico Francesconi Research Director IGSG - CNR [ex ITTIG - CNR] Institute of Legal Informatics and Judicial Systems National Research Council of Italy Via de' Barucci 20 50127 Florence Italy email: enrico.francesconi@cnr.it From: Amanda Baber via RT <drafts-eval@iana.org> Sent: 02 January 2024 20:04 Cc: caterina.lupo@gmail.com <caterina.lupo@gmail.com>; ENRICO FRANCESCONI <enrico.francesconi@cnr.it>; rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org <rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org>; barryleiba@gmail.com <barryleiba@gmail.com>; pierluigi.spinosa@gmail.com <pierluigi.spinosa@gmail.com>; iesg@ietf.org <iesg@ietf.org> Subject: [IANA #1298511] Conflict Review requested for draft-spinosa-urn-lex (BEGIN IANA COMMENTS) IESG/Authors/ISE: IANA will need the authors to take action before we can complete the registrations for draft-spinosa-urn-lex-21. It should also be noted that the public mailing lists meant to review those registrations may not have many active members. We understand that this document will require three IANA actions: 1) updating the reference for the existing "lex" registration at https://www.iana.org/assignments/urn-namespaces, 2) adding a NAPTR record to the urn.arpa domain, and 3) adding a NAPTR record to the urn.uri.arpa domain. However, according to RFC 3405, in order to add records to urn.arpa and uri.arpa, the authors must submit their requests to these mailing lists for a two-week public review: https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/register-urn https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/register-uri Because those lists (which haven't seen much activity post-2011) currently have ~20 members each, we've sent informal review requests to Leslie Daigle and Ted Hardie. We haven't heard from Leslie yet, but Ted had these notes:
My quick scan of this sees a few potential issues with things listed as SHOULD which I believe would be better as MUST; I was also a little confused by this:
"Such DNS routing chain does not work for all the URN components containing %-encoded characters. Therefore, when converting a lex:URN in UTF-8 code to a DNS query, clients MUST perform any necessary punycode conversion [RFC5891] before sending the query."
There are no designated experts for urn.arpa or uri.arpa, so unless the IESG instructs us otherwise, we'll mark this document "IANA OK" two weeks after the authors submit their review requests, provided that the lists don't raise any of the objections described in Section 5 of RFC 3405. Best regards, Amanda Baber IANA Operations Manager (END IANA COMMENTS) ________________________________ From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Sent: 06 January 2024 01:30 To: ENRICO FRANCESCONI <enrico.francesconi@cnr.it>; register-uri@uri.arpa <register-uri@uri.arpa> Cc: drafts-eval@iana.org <drafts-eval@iana.org>; caterina.lupo@gmail.com <caterina.lupo@gmail.com>; rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org <rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org>; barryleiba@gmail.com <barryleiba@gmail.com>; pierluigi.spinosa@gmail.com <pierluigi.spinosa@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Register-URI] Adding a NAPTR record to the uri.arpa domain On 1/5/24 2:09 PM, ENRICO FRANCESCONI via Register-uri wrote:
Dear Colleagues, we are writing to take the following action before completing the registration for draft-spinosa-urn-lex-21 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-spinosa-urn-lex/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-spinosa-urn-lex/>). According to RFC 3405, we kindly ask you to add a NAPTR record related to the "lex" namespace to the uri.arpa domain.
Ciao Enrico, I'm not an expert on the process for adding NAPTR records to the uri.arpa domain, but if I recall correctly (and based on a quick re-reading of RFC 3405), this domain is reserved for URI schemes. However, there is no `lex` URI scheme, so I don't immediately see how we could add `lex` to uri.arpa. On the other hand, your request to register a NAPTR record in the urn.arpa domain seems perfectly legitimate, since we've already added `lex` as a formal namespace ID in the URN namespaces registry. [1] Peter [1] https://www.iana.org/assignments/urn-namespaces/urn-namespaces.xhtml
On 1/6/24 3:05 AM, ENRICO FRANCESCONI wrote:
Hi Peter, thanks for your feedback and for notifying us that "lex" namespace is already in the "urn.arpa" domain.
Perhaps my message was not clear. The `lex` URN NID is registered in the IANA registry for URN namespaces, but it still needs to be added to the urn.arpa domain. We can discuss that on the register-urn list, not here.
As for the "uri.arpa" domain, actually it was a mistake of mine: my request would have been for the "urn.uri.arpa" domain,
I think you meant urn.arpa. I don't know what urn.uri.arpa is.
as requested by Amanda Baber (IANA Operations Manager) (see below).
This need is also reported in the "lex" draft at Section 12 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-spinosa-urn-lex/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-spinosa-urn-lex/>
If I well understood, the update of the NAPTR records is to be reflected in the draft at Section 12 too (according to Eliot's request). If this is the case, we will update the draft accordingly and upload a new version soon.
Great, thanks. Peter
Hi again,
On 01/06/2024 10:22 AM EST Peter Saint-Andre via Register-uri <register-uri@uri.arpa> wrote:
As for the "uri.arpa" domain, actually it was a mistake of mine: my request would have been for the "urn.uri.arpa" domain,
I think you meant urn.arpa. I don't know what urn.uri.arpa is.
Why wouldn't you know what that is Peter? It certainly exists. urn.uri.arpa. 21600 IN NAPTR 0 0 "" "" "/urn:([^:]+)/\\1/i" . urn.uri.arpa. 21600 IN RRSIG NAPTR 8 3 86400 20240125034136 20240104073351 63853 uri.arpa. Z4atPGusPjctORaGL399bdXB05/2+40FEhIDUztAXRYDDe47b6Md+E0p 98M2naH3l3x4wK54nlZbzohhzR54tjDtXvtGGSPVst9h0pYImPEdNZ6X QJHsOpRkY0B6o1795K2w73Ue2DkmkFKwW5ivUxJFuDSzS7s6SCo+b0Rb LuM=
On 1/6/24 9:18 AM, Timothy Mcsweeney wrote:
Hi again,
On 01/06/2024 10:22 AM EST Peter Saint-Andre via Register-uri <register-uri@uri.arpa> wrote:
As for the "uri.arpa" domain, actually it was a mistake of mine: my request would have been for the "urn.uri.arpa" domain,
I think you meant urn.arpa. I don't know what urn.uri.arpa is.
Why wouldn't you know what that is Peter?
Because ignorance is a thing.
It certainly exists.
Thanks for enlightening me. Peter
On 01/06/2024 11:20 AM EST Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> wrote:
On 1/6/24 9:18 AM, Timothy Mcsweeney wrote:
Hi again,
On 01/06/2024 10:22 AM EST Peter Saint-Andre via Register-uri <register-uri@uri.arpa> wrote:
As for the "uri.arpa" domain, actually it was a mistake of mine: my request would have been for the "urn.uri.arpa" domain,
I think you meant urn.arpa. I don't know what urn.uri.arpa is.
Why wouldn't you know what that is Peter?
Because ignorance is a thing.
It certainly exists.
Thanks for enlightening me.
Peter
Anytime Peter! And how did you end up on this email thread anyways? I don't see your email(s) on the register-uri mailing list. Tim
On 1/6/24 1:37 PM, Timothy Mcsweeney wrote:
On 01/06/2024 11:20 AM EST Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> wrote:
On 1/6/24 9:18 AM, Timothy Mcsweeney wrote:
Hi again,
On 01/06/2024 10:22 AM EST Peter Saint-Andre via Register-uri <register-uri@uri.arpa> wrote:
As for the "uri.arpa" domain, actually it was a mistake of mine: my request would have been for the "urn.uri.arpa" domain,
I think you meant urn.arpa. I don't know what urn.uri.arpa is.
Why wouldn't you know what that is Peter?
Because ignorance is a thing.
It certainly exists.
Thanks for enlightening me.
Peter
Anytime Peter! And how did you end up on this email thread anyways? I don't see your email(s) on the register-uri mailing list.
The original message had many addresses in the `to` and `cc` lines, which might have caused subsequent messages to be held for moderation. Peter
Dear Eliot, Peter, Murray, we have received the following notification https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/conflict-review-spinosa-urn-lex/ which seems good news to us! On our side, we made progress about the availability of the lex-nameserver responsible for the resolution of the "lex" namespace. Our colleagues of the IIT-CNR (Institute of Informatics and Telematics of the CNR, https://www.iit.cnr.it/en/) is going to make available such service with requirements of continuity and security. Please consider that IIT-CNR is responsible for the management of the domain names under .it and .eu On the other hand, IGSG-CNR (Institute of Legal Informatics and Judicial Systems of the CNR, https://www.igsg.cnr.it/en ) will be responsible for the administrative part. A memorandum of understanding between IGSG and IIT will be prepared, pointing out the levels of governance. We will keep you posted about any progress, in the meantime please let us know if we have to do anything else. In particular, shall we do anything in preparation of the telechat on February 15th? If I well understood this is not a chat we have to take part of. Thanks! Best Pierluigi and Enrico --- Enrico Francesconi Research Director IGSG - CNR [ex ITTIG - CNR] Institute of Legal Informatics and Judicial Systems National Research Council of Italy Via de' Barucci 20 50127 Florence Italy Tel: +39-055-4399-665 Fax: +39-055-4399-605 email: enrico.francesconi@igsg.cnr.it enrico.francesconi@cnr.it
Ok. IANA/Murray, are you good with my approval and the authors' approval on this? Eliot On 02.02.2024 10:58, ENRICO FRANCESCONI wrote:
Dear Eliot, Peter, Murray, we have received the following notification https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/conflict-review-spinosa-urn-lex/ which seems good news to us!
On our side, we made progress about the availability of the lex-nameserver responsible for the resolution of the "lex" namespace. Our colleagues of the IIT-CNR (Institute of Informatics and Telematics of the CNR, https://www.iit.cnr.it/en/) is going to make available such service with requirements of continuity and security. Please consider that IIT-CNR is responsible for the management of the domain names under .it and .eu On the other hand, IGSG-CNR (Institute of Legal Informatics and Judicial Systems of the CNR, https://www.igsg.cnr.it/en ) will be responsible for the administrative part. A memorandum of understanding between IGSG and IIT will be prepared, pointing out the levels of governance. We will keep you posted about any progress, in the meantime please let us know if we have to do anything else. In particular, shall we do anything in preparation of the telechat on February 15th? If I well understood this is not a chat we have to take part of.
Thanks! Best Pierluigi and Enrico
--- Enrico Francesconi Research Director IGSG - CNR [ex ITTIG - CNR] Institute of Legal Informatics and Judicial Systems National Research Council of Italy
Via de' Barucci 20 50127 Florence Italy
Tel: +39-055-4399-665 Fax: +39-055-4399-605 email: enrico.francesconi@igsg.cnr.it enrico.francesconi@cnr.it
Hi Eliot, Murray, This works for IANA. If Murray doesn't object, we'll move ahead once we receive the standard notice that the draft is ready for processing as an RFC. thanks, Amanda On Fri Feb 02 18:30:52 2024, rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org wrote:
Ok.
IANA/Murray, are you good with my approval and the authors' approval on this?
Eliot
On 02.02.2024 10:58, ENRICO FRANCESCONI wrote:
Dear Eliot, Peter, Murray, we have received the following notification https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/conflict-review-spinosa-urn-lex/ which seems good news to us!
On our side, we made progress about the availability of the lex-nameserver responsible for the resolution of the "lex" namespace. Our colleagues of the IIT-CNR (Institute of Informatics and Telematics of the CNR, https://www.iit.cnr.it/en/) is going to make available such service with requirements of continuity and security. Please consider that IIT-CNR is responsible for the management of the domain names under .it and .eu On the other hand, IGSG-CNR (Institute of Legal Informatics and Judicial Systems of the CNR, https://www.igsg.cnr.it/en ) will be responsible for the administrative part. A memorandum of understanding between IGSG and IIT will be prepared, pointing out the levels of governance. We will keep you posted about any progress, in the meantime please let us know if we have to do anything else. In particular, shall we do anything in preparation of the telechat on February 15th? If I well understood this is not a chat we have to take part of.
Thanks! Best Pierluigi and Enrico
--- Enrico Francesconi Research Director IGSG - CNR [ex ITTIG - CNR] Institute of Legal Informatics and Judicial Systems National Research Council of Italy
Via de' Barucci 20 50127 Florence Italy
Tel: +39-055-4399-665 Fax: +39-055-4399-605 email: enrico.francesconi@igsg.cnr.it enrico.francesconi@cnr.it
participants (5)
-
Amanda Baber via RT -
ENRICO FRANCESCONI -
Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear) -
Peter Saint-Andre -
Timothy Mcsweeney