The prospero URI Scheme
draft-hoffman-prospero-uri-03

[Ballot comment]
Reviewed by Mark Allman, Gen-ART

Review:

Comments:

  + So, this is the IETF... where 1.5 pages of text requires until -03
    to publish.  Sheesh.  But, having said that ....

  + The abstract could be better.  It is not clear what the purpose of
    this document is until reading the intro.  I.e., it's not clear in
    the abstract why we are obsoleting an RFC only to turn around and
    publish this one to keep it alive.

  + It seems damn curious that it is important to keep this URI on the
    standards track with the note in the document that says nobody uses
    the protocol.  It is not even clear to me that the protocol itself
    is standards track (or anything!), which begs the question of why
    this document needs to exist.  I would have liked to see a little
    more about why it is important then.  That said, I don't think there
    is anything fundamentally dangerous or unsafe or whatever associated
    with this document.

  + Should something from IANA be cited with regards to port 1525?

  + The [PROSP] contains too little bibliographic information.  I doubt
    I could find that document.  Is this a tech report?  A white paper?
    What?

To sum, I don't see any huge issues... I think the document could be
tightened and I don't understand the need, but I don't think there is
any sort of show-stoppers in here.

Follow-up IANA Comments:

The IANA will only update the reference for this URI sheme and will wait for changes to the registry at a later time.

Response from Ted Hardie:
Hi Michelle,
My personal opinion here is that we should not add a section to the registry at this point.  The URI folk are still discussing a proposal to update the registry structure (along the message header lines), and at that point we can consider whether there should be a section for Historic or its equivalent.
If we do anything, I would suggest just capturing the state of the reference doc (Proposed, Draft, Informational) as a column next to the reference doc name.  But I don't think we need it right now.
regards,
Ted Hardie