OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xri-editors message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: [xri-editors] Important new XRID issue


I agree with Dave here.  It is awfully late in the process to be
bringing up changes that may be far-reaching. I also don't particularly
understand the actual requirement here.  It seems that a solution is
being proposed for an unspoken requirement.  

Since i-names and i-numbers already will resolve to different
authorities, I'm not seeing the problem you are trying to address.  Even
if I assume that we are talking about mixing resolutions of both
persistent and reassignable i-names, and that loads and traffic patterns
are different between the two kinds of resolutions -- one being high
volume and the other a lower volume, isn't the lower volume traffic just
swamped by (and easily absorbed in) the high volume traffic?

Mike 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dave McAlpin [mailto:Dave.McAlpin@epok.net] 
>Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 10:47 AM
>To: Peter C Davis
>Cc: xri-editors@lists.oasis-open.org; Drummond Reed; Wachob, 
>Gabe; Victor Grey; Fen Labalme
>Subject: RE: [xri-editors] Important new XRID issue
>
>We can do this kind of enhancement forever. People will always be able
>to think of ways to specialize XRID elements in reasonable 
>ways, Service
>probably even more than Authority. And this _is_ a special case - we
>could just as easily say we wanted different authorities for ranges of
>persistent identifiers, or an authority that returns XDI style
>descriptors or whatever. At this point our priority should be releasing
>a spec, which means only fixing things that are clearly broken. I don't
>think this qualifies as broken.
>
>Dave
>


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]