Subj : Re: Is binkp/d's security model kaputt?
To   : tenser
From : deon
Date : Fri Sep 24 2021 08:26 am

  Re: Re: Is binkp/d's security model kaputt?
  By: tenser to deon on Fri Sep 24 2021 01:04 am

 > Something like, `X-ftn/ftsXXX` for legacy formats
 > defined by Fidonet standards, and something like,
 > `X-json/x.y.z` for a JSON serialized version,
 > where `x.y.z` is a semantically versioned schema
 > identifier?

So I wasnt thinking of X-*. Nor referencing anything "Fidonet standards" in the value. If it ever becomes a standard, the standard will describe what is in use without naming itself.

I was thinking of the prefix "ftn/", eg ftn/2 for a v2 bundle (or it could be 2.e,2.2,2+, since that is what they are more commonly known as, etc), ftn/4 for a v4 bundle, etc. Maybe just ftn/json for a json bundle.

I guess "ftn" could be changed to "fido" - but keeping it short and suite.


....лоеп
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
 * Origin: I'm playing with ANSI+videotex - wanna play too? (21:2/116)

.