[AFS3-std] AFS and 'afs' URI scheme

Thu, 31 Mar 2011 17:45:39 +0300

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------050204040509090103050904
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello all,

I am writing to request some information regarding AFS and its current 
implementations.  I hope this is the right list to ask.

So my question is whether the latest versions of current AFS 
implementation still use 'afs' URI scheme.  The 'afs' URI scheme can be 
found mentioned as reserved for further standardization in RFC 1738 
(http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1738) dated December 1994, but there is 
no any definition of the scheme's syntax/semantics.

Currently the 'afs' URI scheme is registered by IANA as Provisional with 
reference to RFC 1738.  In the previous year there were some some 
discussions in the IETF regarding what should be done with it.  However 
there was no consensus on any actions; two were proposed - move the 
scheme to Historical category or remain it as is.  I'd like to hear the 
opinion of AFS experts.

Thank you in advance,
Mykyta Yevstifeyev

--------------050204040509090103050904
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
  <head>

    <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
    <font size="-1"><big>Hello all,<br>
        <br>
        I am writing to request some information regarding AFS and its
        current implementations.  I hope this is the right list to ask.<br>
        <br>
        So my question is whether the latest versions of current AFS
        implementation still use 'afs' URI scheme.  The 'afs' URI scheme
        can be found mentioned as reserved for further standardization
        in RFC 1738 (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1738">http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1738</a>) dated December
        1994, but there is no any definition of the scheme's
        syntax/semantics.  <br>
        <br>
        Currently the 'afs' URI scheme is registered by IANA as
        Provisional with reference to RFC 1738.  In the previous year
        there were some some discussions in the IETF regarding what
        should be done with it.  However there was no consensus on any
        actions; two were proposed - move the scheme to Historical
        category or remain it as is.  I'd like to hear the opinion of
        AFS experts.<br>
        <br>
        Thank you in advance,<br>
        Mykyta Yevstifeyev<br>
      </big></font>
  </body>
</html>

--------------050204040509090103050904--