Re: The Path URN Specification

Michael Shapiro (mshapiro@ncsa.uiuc.edu)
Mon, 27 Mar 1995 09:51:09 -0600 (CST)


From: mshapiro@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Michael Shapiro)
Message-Id: <9503271551.AA23255@void.ncsa.uiuc.edu>
Subject: Re: The Path URN Specification
To: jcurran@nic.near.net (John Curran)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 09:51:09 -0600 (CST)
Cc: uri@bunyip.com
In-Reply-To: <v02110103ab9c248b8a9c@[198.114.157.23]> from "John Curran" at Mar 27, 95 03:24:16 am

John Curran wrote:
|
|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 
|
|Hmm.
|
|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?

If you are asking if there is a relationship between the existing
hostnames and the "path.urn" names - there is not. They are unrelated.
It would probably be the case that some of the same machines that
function as nameservers for hostnames would also function as servers
for the "path.urn" namespace, but this isn't required. New machines can
become nameservers for "path.urn" that do not act as nameservers for
hostnames.


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

My answer here assumes you meant <path:/edu/uiuc/...>.  (Otherwise I
think I don't understand the question.)

The "path.urn" name space would have to be delegated from the top down,
like the DNS hostnames are now. It might turn out that Universities
want an "edu" subdomain under "path.urn" (edu.path.urn) and the same
nameservers that serve the hostname "edu" domain also used serve the
"edu.path.urn" domain. You wouldn't be able to "register" anything
without consent from some parent in the "path.urn" namespace.

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

I'm uncertain as to the content of such a discussion. Would it be a
suggestion for the top level names (or perhaps even one or two levels
down).  How did the existing set of DNS domains get instituted? How
would this discussion diverge from the (existing) discussions about
hostnames?

Would it include discussions about the erosion of semantics in any name
over time? 

Or would it be limited to things like delegating and subsuming
(un-delegating) parts of the path namespace?

-- 
Michael Shapiro                   mshapiro@ncsa.uiuc.edu
NCSA                              (217) 244-6642
605 E Springfield Ave. RM 152CAB  fax: (217) 333-5973
Champaign, IL 61820