Re: Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-xmpp-posh-04: (with COMMENT)

>> If you like, it could even do POSH service names and POSH format
>> names, and specify ".well-known/posh/<servicename>/<formatname>",
>
> Currently it's the <servicename> field that we're most interested in.

Right... and that's what I'm suggesting an FCFS registry for.  You
register "posh" in .well-known, and you create your own FCFS registry
for service names, and if you don't care about the format as a
separate thing, you just register "spice.json" (and so on) in your
FCFS registry.  That way, Mark doesn't get involved in approving
"posh.x" and "posh.y" and "posh.z", when Mark has no idea of what to
say about posh service names (or seedy ones, for that matter).

> Perhaps it makes sense to talk about it again with Mark?

Sounds like a plan.

b