Re: iDNR, an alternative name resolution protocol

Keith Moore (moore@cs.utk.edu)
Thu, 03 Sep 1998 00:46:43 -0400


Message-Id: <199809030446.AAA23351@spot.cs.utk.edu>
From: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
To: "Jon Davis" <jdavis@inetinit.org>
cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu>,
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 01 Sep 1998 17:04:21 PDT."
             <000e01bdd605$3ca3f300$637a0118@c603887-a.ptbrg1.sfba.home.com> 
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1998 00:46:43 -0400
Subject: Re: iDNR, an alternative name resolution protocol 

> Right.  I understand, you're saying that if you update the spec, existing
> implemenations will not be compatible with the updated spec?  But, now, if
> the existing spec is too limited to support forward-compatibility to future
> adaptations, what can one do, except break the spec?  

You define a new kind of identifier which is not a URI.

That way, if people want to define things which *are* compatible
with the installed base, they can still reference the URI spec.

Keith