summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc3349.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc3349.txt')
-rw-r--r--doc/rfc/rfc3349.txt339
1 files changed, 339 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc3349.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc3349.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..da16612
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc3349.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,339 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Network Working Group M. Rose
+Request for Comments: 3349 Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.
+BCP: 59 July 2002
+Category: Best Current Practice
+
+
+ A Transient Prefix for Identifying Profiles under Development by the
+ Working Groups of the Internet Engineering Task Force
+
+Status of this Memo
+
+ This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the
+ Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
+ improvements. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
+
+Copyright Notice
+
+ Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved.
+
+Abstract
+
+ As a part of their deliverables, working groups of the IETF may
+ develop BEEP profiles. During the development process, it is
+ desirable to assign a transient identifier to each profile. If the
+ profile is subsequently published as an RFC, then a permanent
+ identifier is subsequently assigned by the IANA.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rose Best Current Practice [Page 1]
+
+RFC 3349 Transient IDs for BEEP Profiles July 2002
+
+
+Table of Contents
+
+ 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
+ 2. Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
+ 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
+ References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
+ A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
+ B. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
+ Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
+ Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rose Best Current Practice [Page 2]
+
+RFC 3349 Transient IDs for BEEP Profiles July 2002
+
+
+1. Introduction
+
+ Each BEEP profile [1] is identified by a URI [2]. The BEEP
+ specification uses URIs to identify a BEEP profile both:
+
+ o statically, when a profile is formally defined (RFC 3080's Section
+ 5.1); and,
+
+ o dynamically, during channel management (RFC 3080's Section 2.3.1).
+
+ If the BEEP profile appears on the standards-track [3], then the IANA
+ is responsible for assigning the URI associated with the BEEP
+ profile. Otherwise, the entity specifying the BEEP profile is free
+ to assign a URI under its administration to the profile.
+
+ If a working group of the IETF is developing a BEEP profile, then,
+ during the development process, it is desirable to use a transient
+ identifier for the profile. Further, it is desirable that the
+ transient identifier be associated with the working group.
+
+ This memo defines the practice for making such an assignment. Note
+ that this practice does not apply to activities outside of working
+ groups -- anyone able to assign a URL is capable of defining a URI
+ for the purposes of identifying the BEEP profiles that they develop.
+
+2. Practice
+
+ When a working group is formed, the IETF secretariat assigns a brief
+ mnemonic prefix to the working group, e.g., "provreg" or "sacred".
+
+ When a working group begins development of a document which specifies
+ a BEEP profile, the working group chair assigns a transient
+ identifier of the form "http://iana.org/beep/transient/XXX/YYY" where
+ "XXX" is the working group's mnemonic and "YYY" is a unique string.
+ Although the resulting URI must conform to the URI syntax, the "YYY"
+ portion is otherwise arbitrary. For example, it may contain a sub-
+ hierarchy (e.g., "epp/1.0").
+
+ For example,
+
+ http://iana.org/beep/transient/provreg/epp/1.0
+ http://iana.org/beep/transient/sacred/pdm
+
+ might be assigned by the chairs of the "provreg" and "sacred" working
+ groups, respectively.
+
+ Following this, the working group chair completes a BEEP profile
+ registration template, and submits this information to the IANA.
+
+
+
+Rose Best Current Practice [Page 3]
+
+RFC 3349 Transient IDs for BEEP Profiles July 2002
+
+
+ Note that although the IETF hasn't established a practice with
+ respect to the use of capitalization in URLs employed for namespace
+ purposes, the W3C has a lowercase-only policy. Working group chairs
+ are encouraged to consider this when making assignments.
+
+3. Security Considerations
+
+ This document describes an administrative convention and raises no
+ additional security considerations. Of course, each BEEP-based
+ protocol has its own set of security considerations, which should be
+ described in the relevant specification.
+
+References
+
+ [1] Rose, M., "The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol Core", RFC
+ 3080, March 2001.
+
+ [2] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R. and L. Masinter, "Uniform Resource
+ Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396, August 1998.
+
+ [3] Hovey, R. and S. Bradner, "The Organizations Involved in the
+ IETF Standards Process", BCP 11, RFC 2028, October 1996.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rose Best Current Practice [Page 4]
+
+RFC 3349 Transient IDs for BEEP Profiles July 2002
+
+
+Appendix A. Acknowledgements
+
+ The author gratefully acknowledges the contributions of: Dan Kohn and
+ Bob Wyman.
+
+Appendix B. IANA Considerations
+
+ The IANA maintains a registry of transient identifiers used for BEEP
+ profiles under development in the IETF, using the profile
+ registration template defined in Section 5.1 of [1].
+
+ Note that unlike the registration procedures defined in Appendix B of
+ [1], the working group chair (instead of the IESG) is responsible for
+ authorizing the registration.
+
+Author's Address
+
+ Marshall T. Rose
+ Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.
+ POB 255268
+ Sacramento, CA 95865-5268
+ US
+
+ Phone: +1 916 483 8878
+ EMail: mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rose Best Current Practice [Page 5]
+
+RFC 3349 Transient IDs for BEEP Profiles July 2002
+
+
+Full Copyright Statement
+
+ Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved.
+
+ This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
+ others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
+ or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
+ and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
+ kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
+ included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
+ document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
+ the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
+ Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
+ developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
+ copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
+ followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
+ English.
+
+ The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
+ revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
+
+ This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
+ "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
+ TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
+ BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
+ HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
+ MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
+
+Acknowledgement
+
+ Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
+ Internet Society.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Rose Best Current Practice [Page 6]
+