- From: <hardie@equinix.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 15:47:02 -0700 (PDT)
- To: connolly@w3.org (Dan Connolly)
- Cc: michael@neonym.net (Michael Mealling), uri@w3.org
Dan writes: > Hmm.. that seems easy to fix... and I suggest that > the IETF community is getting a lot of value out of > being able to contact the IETF at http://www.ietf.org/ . Absolutely true. > > > There > > is a policy built into the URN approval process that mandates that > > if the IETF abandons or re-uses the 'ietf' URN namespace that it > > is an _error_ on the part of the IETF. > > > > I.e. if the IETF were to change domain-names you'd just have to deal > > with it. > > It's hard for me to imagine that the value of doing so would > ever even approach the cost. We've just moved some protocol element identifiers from .int to .arpa, so it does happen. More important, we may someday want to move from http://www.ietf.org/ to foo://ietf.org/ . We'd feel like pretty silly folks right now if we were tied to a gopher namespace, wouldn't we? regards, Ted Hardie
Received on Tuesday, 25 September 2001 18:47:09 UTC