Re: finger url

Marc VanHeyningen (
Wed, 24 Aug 1994 10:04:27 -0500

> Is it _really_ needed? No, but for a different reason. I wanted
> this for end users who want to have pointers to finger servers.
> Setting up more servers (finger gateways) is anti-scalable and
> doubles the load on the net. I'd much prefer the gopher hack to
> that.

Of course, I'd like to think that finger gateways like ours actually
add value rather than doubling load for no reason, but yes.

> But yes, ease of use is the only actual reason for it.

The proposed spec looks OK by me; I'd just have two comments...

- I think you mean RFC 1288, not 1128.
- This probably should go through the URI WG (not to start any religious
wars, but it would be best of the two different incarnations of URLs
did not drift any further apart.)

- Marc