Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-saintandre-xmpp-urn-02

From: Spencer Dawkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 11:55:36 -0600

I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-saintandre-xmpp-urn-02
Reviewer: Spencer Dawkins
Review Date: 19 Feb 2007
IESG Telechat date: 22 Feb 2007

Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Informational RFC. I have 
questions, probably because XMPP is not my area of expertise, but my 
questions shouldn't affect approval of this specification.

Comments:

I did not see any discussion of whether the previous jabber.org URNs would 
be duplicated into this name space or not, although the text justifying 
creation of this namespace said that the new namespace was needed to ensure 
continuity for applications, and the document says there are a "large 
number" of XMPP extensions now. Perhaps the document could say whether the 
intention is to allow existing applications to migrate to the new namespace 
or not.

I was somewhat confused about why xmpp.org names would be more permanent and 
reliable than jabber.org names, but perhaps everyone knows the answer except 
me :-)

I saw Sam's original DISCUSS (now held by Ted), and suspect that I would be 
happy with any resolution of that DISCUSS.

Thanks,

Spencer

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 14:15:15 -0700

Spencer Dawkins wrote:
> Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Informational RFC. I 
> have questions, probably because XMPP is not my area of expertise, but 
> my questions shouldn't affect approval of this specification.
> 
> Comments:
> 
> I did not see any discussion of whether the previous jabber.org URNs 
> would be duplicated into this name space or not, although the text 
> justifying creation of this namespace said that the new namespace was 
> needed to ensure continuity for applications, and the document says 
> there are a "large number" of XMPP extensions now. Perhaps the document 
> could say whether the intention is to allow existing applications to 
> migrate to the new namespace or not.

At this time there are no plans for a wholesale migration of older 
jabber:* and http://jabber.org/* names to urn:xmpp:* names. However, 
over time we probably will migrate many of the older namespaces.

> I was somewhat confused about why xmpp.org names would be more permanent 
> and reliable than jabber.org names, but perhaps everyone knows the 
> answer except me :-)

The new URN namespace names are not particularly associated with the 
xmpp.org domain, instead they are associated with the XMPP Standards 
Foundation (XSF), which is a non-profit Delaware corporation founded in 
2001 to document and define XMPP extensions. As long as the organization 
exists, the URNs will be issued and maintained.

The XSF owns the xmpp.org domain (well, I do, but I do so as the 
Executive Director of the XSF), but the XSF does not own the jabber.org 
domain (which is owned by Jeremie Miller, who invented the core Jabber 
technologies back in 1998). I foresee no time at which Jeremie will not 
control the jabber.org domain, but that is possible and in any case that 
domain is not associated at all with the XSF.

> I saw Sam's original DISCUSS (now held by Ted), and suspect that I would 
> be happy with any resolution of that DISCUSS.

Thanks for the review.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
XMPP Standards Foundation
http://www.xmpp.org/xsf/people/stpeter.shtml