Re: communication between URC servers

Paul Hoffman (ietf-lists@proper.com)
Thu, 6 Jul 1995 18:50:28 -0700


Message-Id: <v02120c0dac22417a0c5f@[165.227.40.19]>
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 1995 18:50:28 -0700
To: "Ronald E. Daniel" <rdaniel@acl.lanl.gov>
From: ietf-lists@proper.com (Paul Hoffman)
Subject: Re: communication between URC servers
Cc: uri@bunyip.com

>A second solution is for the naming authority to have a list of other
>URCs for the same resource. When the NA changes its URC, a message can
>go out to all the URC servers on the list. In principle it would be
>possible for these updates to occur automatically, although the amount
>of trust to place in these update messages will depend upon the
>strength of the cryptography employed and the business relations in
>place between the two organizations. A disadvantage of this approach is
>that third parties must register with the publisher, something they may
>not wish to do. Second, if recent proposals for rating services come to
>fruition, this list could actually get rather long.

A spin-off of this second solution is for someone other than the NA to keep
the list. This could be one or more trade groups who serve their members by
keeping them up to date without revealing identities. All members of a
particular group promise to post updates to their URCs, and have free
access to the URC updates housed by the group. If the process is
sufficiently automated, the cost for running such a server might be very
low. Groups like OCLC and the ISBN administration might make such a server
available free to its members and cheap to others.

Even if the list is rather long, it only needs to be checked every week or
two. If the updates are stored by date, getting on the most recent ones is
trivial.

--Paul Hoffman
--Proper Publishing