Re: BEEP Transport

["Marshall T. Rose" <mrose+mtr.netnews@dbc.mtview.ca.us>]

> I believe it completely inappropriate for a WG draft to define a profile
> using vendor-specific URIs.  I'm not aware of any IETF document that
> describes IETF-standard BEEP profile definition procedures; does such a
> document exist?  Perhaps one is needed if not, but in the mean time I
think
> it would be better to expand on the xml.resource.org precedent used by
other
> profiles described in IETF WG documents (such as those defined for TLS and
> SASL).

hi. i don't think it will be difficult to set-up a work-in-progress prefix
for beep profiles that are under development. i'll start moving on that.

a few working group have been using the xml.resource.org thing as a
place-holder and no one on the iesg has objected, so i think you're safe in
provreg to use that until the work-in-progress thing is set-up...

best,

/mtr