Several replies in one message: On 2009-12-15 19:30, Lixia Zhang wrote: > > On Dec 14, 2009, at 6:58 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> ...... >> >>> >>> Or, at least, that's my theory - and I'm sticking to it! :-) >>> >>>> Also I feel it should support hierarchy, even if we don't need a >>>> hierarchy from the start. >>> >>> Hierarchy in the names in the namespaces, or a hierarchy _of_ >>> namespaces? >>> Sorry, wasn't quite clear from your brief comment. >> >> I was thinking about a hierarchy of namespaces, but in fact we probably >> need the generality to support hierarchical names too. I don't think that >> needs to make the simple case inefficient. Just make a couple of the >> basic >> data definitions recursive, and you've got both hierarchies. >> >> Brian > > a clarification question: wonder what is the "name space" referred to in > the above?
I was interpreting Noel to mean what we colloquially call an "address space", whether identifier-addresses or locator-addresses. But namespace is an abstract concept. I have a little trouble with the IEN19 definition, since it clearly uses "name" for what we now call identifier and "address" for what we now call locator. On 2009-12-15 22:52, Tony Li wrote: > Our recommendation is focused on providing an alternative routing > architecture. A mapping system is a fine component, but would not seem to > provide a credible architecture by itself. I agree, but what it means is that a routing proposal that requires a mapping solution needs to specify it. I'm arguing that it needs to specify it as a separable component. On 2009-12-16 03:55, Noel Chiappa wrote: > >>> Also I feel it should support hierarchy, even if we don't need a > >>> hierarchy from the start. > > > I was thinking about a hierarchy of namespaces > > To help me understand how this would work, could you give an example? http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~brian/layers.pdf > > > Just make a couple of the basic data definitions recursive, and you've > > got both hierarchies. > > And an example of this too... Oh, I was just thinking in BNF terms, or defining the namespaces like DNS does. Not intended to be a profound statement. But it does get you to variable length addresses, locator = prefix suffix [locator] or something like that. Brian _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
