Tony, First, there are a different uses for identifiers and each has different requirements. Before we can talk about properties for "identifiers" in general we need to separate out which particular uses we are talking about. For example, are you including discovery starting from FQDNs? Kerberos identifiers for auth/auth?
Second, what is the purpose of the exercise? I suspect that every practical use case knows what properties it needs already for its various identifiers. If you look at the requirements of a specific use case the properties fall out. One possible purpose I could see (and one I was trying to get at in my slides) would be to reduce the number of identifiers we think we need. What do you have in mind? Scott Excerpts from Tony Li on Tue, Apr 14, 2009 08:52:00PM -0700: > > Hi all, > > Thank you for your help with the terminology discussion. I'd like to > propose the next question: what are the necessary and sufficient > properties of identifiers? > > We discussed this at Dagstuhl and came away with the following: > > - topology‐independent > - stable, at discretion of owner > - unambiguous > - distinguishable (two for same object?) > - facilitate session‐level referrals > > Thoughts? > > Tony > > _______________________________________________ > rrg mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
