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

[Mykyta Yevstifeyev]

31.03.2011 18:02, Andrew Deason wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 17:45:39 +0300
> Mykyta Yevstifeyev<evnikita2@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> I am writing to request some information regarding AFS and its current
>> implementations.  I hope this is the right list to ask.
> It is, unless you want to go ask each implementation directly.
>
>> 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.
> Does moving the scheme to Historical impact our ability to use it or
> provide standardization on it in the future? As far as I know, nothing
> uses it right now, but (just speaking for myself) I am significantly
> less sure that it will continue to be unused in the future.
Moving the scheme to Historical category does not restrict its usage, 
but discourages it.  See http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4395#section-4

This document also says nothing about specifying schemes currently 
listed as Historical.  But there is an effort to revise RFC 4395 
currently occurring in the IETF.  The Working Group doing this work on 
the meeting right yesterday agreed that such action will be impossible 
or strongly discouraged.

Mykyta Yevstifeyev