The postal service would have issues when delivering confidential mail to Mr. 
Li if two live at the same address.

Chris Campbell
---------------------
+447796352724

On 17 Jul 2010, at 18:36, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Toni,

I think you are pursuing the wrong objective (which is global uniqueness of the 
identifier).

There are millions of people with the surname Li and yet they aren't a serious 
problem for the postal services.
IMHO ( I have expressed it many times and did also show how to get it done ) 
the Internet routing should also  become as smart  so that local uniqueness of 
any identifier will do.

Remember MADCAP. It was a similar mad idea (RFC2730). It tried to manage a 
clash-free multicast address assignment - globally. It didn't fly at all.

Heiner






-----Ursprüngliche Mitteilung-----
Von: Toni Stoev <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
An: IRTF RRG <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Verschickt: Fr., 16. Jul. 2010, 16:29
Thema: Re: [rrg] Universally unique identifier


Hi Klaas,

On Friday 16 July 2010 at 15:57:06 Klaas Wierenga sent:
> On 7/16/10 9:11 AM, Toni Stoev wrote:
>
> Hi Toni,
>
> Interesting idea, however I am not conviced that a hierarchic model is
> desirable to guarantee uniqueness (I do understand the appeal, don't get
> me wrong). What concerns me is the fact that if you take delegation far
> enough you will end up with a very limited set of "N"-s per domain, and
> thus the ability to track users.

If we don't set unwise limits, like the domain name system doesn't, we have
nothing to worry about. The market will regulate spanning.

> Furthermore, I think the requirements for unique identifiers are not the
> same as for domain names. Arguably the delegation of subdomains is meant
> as a way to indicate some sort of subordinate relation, i.e.
> sales.acme.com<http://sales.acme.com> is the sales department of acme etc. 
> For uniqueness of
> identifiers I see no clear reason why you need a hierarchy, other than
> to avoid collissions.

I agree, the reason differs here. Hierachy is a good way to control
distribution.

> Don't you think it much easier to just use a method with a very low
> probability of collissions and deal with those?

With online distribution we have flexiblity. One can change the identifier at
will.

> Klaas

Thanks
Toni

> > A universally unique identifier is needed to let nodes roam
> > everywhere in the common network while preserving their ongoing
> > communication sessions. To keep identifier unique a system for
> > issuing, distribution and control over it is needed. The system has
> > to provide uniqueness and also be flexible and robust.
> >
> > There is an acting solution with much the said characteristics. That
> > is the DNS with its FQDN. The FQDN is by best effort universally
> > unique. And the DNS has proven itself to be surviving and moreover
> > prevailing. Because of node mobility the Dynamic DNS is the closer
> > match. With this technology a node can change its topological
> > location and retain a same identifier. But the FQDN is not quite
> > suitable for the hereby projected usage. It is made out of names that
> > are for human use. This not a networking best practice.
> >
> > So, can we turn the top supported network node identifier system into
> > a useful solution for also session identification supplement? And
> > how?
> >
> > Yes. By deciphering the N as "number". That's all to it. A dynamic
> > domain number system can supply the desired network node identifier.
> > The fully qualified domain number will be hierarchically structured,
> > fairly distributed, unique.
> >
> > Dear fellow researchers, your choice is welcome.
> >
> > Toni
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
<http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg>http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg


_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg

Reply via email to