243055 - whois: url

Status: VERIFIED WONTFIX

(Core :: Networking, enhancement)

Description

[Lloyd Wood]

whois [-h server] identifier

lends itself well to url form, in a similar way to the mailto: syntax.

whois:identifier
whois:identifier@server

It would be useful to automate this with guessing servers if necessary, e.g
whois:ntk.net
could parse output, see that server is whois.opensrs.net (or know where to check
for top-level domains like .net) and return the human-readable useful results of:
whois:[e-mail]

(I'd write the url form up as an internet-draft, but really this would need to
go get stuck in some W3C committee, and I'm not a paid-up member of the W3C. The
analogy with mailto: is good - why extend a browser to read mail, either?)

Comment 1

[Christian :Biesinger (don't email me, ping me on IRC)]

> I'd write the url form up as an internet-draft, but really this would need to
> go get stuck in some W3C committee

w3c? why? none of the other network protocols has anything to do with w3c. such
things are usually defined by the IETF (http://www.rfc-editor.org/). that just
as an aside...

Comment 2

[Darin Fisher]

To be honest, this doesn't sound like something that will be used by many users.
 My recommendation is to write a browser extension, which can be hosted (for
example) on mozdev.org.  If the extension proves to be popular or useful in some
significant application, then it would be a candidate for inclusion in the
default Mozilla builds.

For now, I think WONTFIX is appropriate.

Feel free to disagree, but be sure to espouse on the overwhelming benefits of
this feature to users and/or the Mozilla platform, which I'm not seeing at the
moment ;-)

Thanks for your interest in Mozilla, and feel free to ask questions about
extension writing (via the newsgroups or direct email).

Comment 3

[Lloyd Wood]

Christian, whois network functionality already exists, so the IETF doesn't need
to define that.

Given RFC2806 (tel:) and RFC2368 (mailto:), an IETF working group might seem
appropriate for a draft describing this, though the IETF's seemed more vigorous
recently about passing over control of specs to the W3C, so I doubt it's still
the IETF's domain. And which working group would the draft be submitted to? (All
RFCs say 'Network Working Group' for historical reasons.)

Comment 4

[benc]

V/wontfix.

I have doubts we (current contributors) will ever go back an implement these
protocols. Unless someone wants this, this is wontfix.

It is worth noting that most of these services are not truly scalable or secure.