Excerpts from Tony Li on Tue, Apr 21, 2009 08:47:17AM -0700: > > Hi Scott, > > Scott Brim wrote: >> In actual use the owner may have committed to a minimum duration. >> Brian's phrasing is better imho. > > Ok, I can live with that. > >>>>> - unambiguous >>>> I'd say: must have a defined scope within which they are unique >>>> and unambiguous. The scope may be universal. [Now define >>>> 'universal'. It's not so easy.] >>> How about 'global' instead? >>> >>> Do we really want local identifiers? >> >> Let's not assume too much about solutions. Everything has scope. > > Again, the point of the discussion is to figure out what classes of > solutions actually are appropriate. It seems to me like supporting > local identifiers is worthy of discussion.
Oh. Then I think we actually agree on procedure, but let's make it explicit: The goal is to figure out which classes of solutions are appropriate, and one input to that is to look at the implications each solution class has on properties of identifiers. Some of us have been saying that you can't do "properties of identifiers" in general, you have to talk about which kinds of identifiers, in which context. I guess you agree. If so, sorry, I hadn't understood. Yes, local identifiers are worthy of discussion. > I've seen one advocate for them (ILNP), where they make a handy > opportunity for those folks who prefer privacy. Changing your > locator to something with local scope does provide benefits in that > area, but it creates issues in others. Do identifiers now come in > a split namespace? Here there be complexity... ;-) Are folks ok > with this? Again, I would like the process to be explicit, otherwise we will probably ramble around and it will be hard to agree on whether we have reached any agreements. Do you want to start specifically with the class of solutions that includes ILNP, look specifically at "host" identifiers, and look at implications/possibilities/requirements? That would be fine with me. _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
