Re: The Path URN Specification

John Curran (
Mon, 27 Mar 1995 03:24:16 -0500

Message-Id: <v02110103ab9c248b8a9c@[]>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 03:24:16 -0500
To: Daniel LaLiberte <>
From: John Curran <>
Subject: Re: The Path URN Specification

At 5:58 PM 3/17/95, Daniel LaLiberte wrote:

>The resolution process proceeds as follows. 
> 1. The entire URN, except the scheme and the final component, is
>   converted to a DNS name appended with ".path.urn". For example, 
>      path:/A/B2/C1/doc.html is converted to 
>      c1.b2.a.path.urn 


Is there an implicit assumption regarding the relationship between
the "ownership" of a given DNS domain and an associated subdomain
under the "path.urn" space?   Is there explicitly no relationship?

For example, could I register one of my servers as the "" URN
servers, and thereby preempt use of URNs which begin <path:/>?

It might be a good idea to have some discussion in the document about
the operational and administrative impacts of this mapping approach.