The type 1 UUID that I proposed earlier would act more as a timestamp and authenticator than as URI.
The type 4 (random) UUID is better suited for many purposes since it is inherently anonymous, but the idea here is to act as a verification of content creator (IM or whatever) as they existed at a particular point in time. This can also be useful for unambiguous identification of freinds and IM originations - certainly not foolproof, but useful all the same. I don't think the inherent privacy issues would impact any foreseeable use in the context of a public identifier such as this. The fact that the user/organization later changes domains after creating the identifier, computer/MAC addresses is really irrelevant since (as I understand it) this is intended to identify somehting created at a particular time and place. Yes the type 1 and type 4 UUIDs are compatible, there is a built in identifier field which tells which type is used. Figuring out which is legitimate (or correct) in a specific situation is a higher level problem. Karen On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Dahlia Trimble <[email protected]>wrote: > Would it be possible to use just the UUID part and not tie it to a specific > domain? I can foresee events where a user and a business/grid/domain > owner/whatever make a decision to go separate ways and then any other > systems out there that have the global identifier referenced may not be able > to use it to contact that user. If only the UUID were used (we already use > UUIDs for many diverse applications and the context implies the specific > usage) it could be similar to a cell phone number where a user can take it > from carrier to carrier. Resolving the current user domain would need to be > worked out but several methods might be considered from a P2P network of > resolvers to one or more central authorities, and/or simply storing it in a > cache in local installations when the UUID is first used. > > If we only use the UUID part then it may have some backward compatibility > with existing user UUIDs used to identify content creators. > > > On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 11:26 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I'm about to introduce global identifiers, so that I can make friends and >> IM work on the hypergrid, and would like feedback on the best form of these >> identifiers. Here are some options: >> >> http://myworld.com:8002/7c4450fc-aeaf-468d-b238-d52955dc868b >> >> myworld.com:8002/7c4450fc-aeaf-468d-b238-d52955dc868b >> >> http://myworld.com:8002/user/7c4450fc-aeaf-468d-b238-d52955dc868b >> >> [email protected]:8002 >> >> ... >> >> In this particular case (for friends and IM) we're dealing with user >> accounts, but the issue is broader than that. Whatever form we choose should >> be applicable to all sorts of resources. >> >> My preference is to use a URI, according to the spec of URIs ( >> http://www.w3.org/Addressing/URL/uri-spec.html). The question is: should >> we add additional specifications on these URIs? Like using the path /user/ >> for user accounts, etc. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Thanks. >> Diva / Crista >> _______________________________________________ >> Opensim-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Opensim-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
