I think it is reasonable to let resource name have a human-understanding
meaning, not just unique ID. And I argue that every resource can be classifed
into a hierarchical domain. I have proposed the resolution for universal
resource name. Please see the following:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-licanhuang-dnsop-urnresolution-00.txt
Domain name is originally for the easy memory of IP address. But, today, we
can think about in this way. The domain name is allotted by authoritve
organization according to provider's contents. It dosn't need and dosn't
allowed to apply a domain name when organizations or persons that do not
provider the corresponding contents and just want to sell the domain name for
profit.
Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--On 17. oktober 2007 12:46 +0100 Lican Huang
wrote:
>
> Dear Mr. Stephane Bortzmeyer,
> I mean a server can have many domain names if the server is the
> provider of many classified things. In the future, the lower layer
> domain name can be registered by the user itself.
This is true today. I register my own resources in my own domain.
But - the DNS is not a directory. It offers no way to search for a name if
you don't know exactly how it is spelled. Thus, putting stuff into the DNS
tends to be useless as a classification scheme.
So I fail to undestand how registering a domain name for a resource is
useful when providing an URL for the same resource is so much more
convenient
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britney_Spears)
Harald Alvestrand
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Tryit now._______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
