[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]