- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 22:27:00 -0500
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Cc: colin.wallis@ssc.govt.nz, ferry.hendrikx@ssc.govt.nz, Didier Martin <martind@netfolder.com>, "'Michael Mealling'" <michael@neonym.net>, "'W3C TAG'" <www-tag@w3.org>
Roy Fielding writes: > Noah has reminded me (off-list) that there is at > least one other example that has been successful, > namely UUIDs/GUIDs. > There are definite advantages to completely > automated, decentralized naming systems (e.g., DCE > to COM to urn:uuid:) Although the official specs seem to be locked away in ISO/IEC 11578, for which there appears to be a charge [1], my impression is that the most common means of generating UUIDs/GUIDs is in fact to use Ethernet or similar MAC addresses as part of the process. My recollection is that these are in fact handed out in batches on a per-vendor basis, and thus are indeed managed centrally. A Google search yielded [2], which is presumably not authoritative but which does support this recollection. Thus, like the DNS names in http URIs, this common form of UUID does indeed trace to a central registry. The structure of such a UUID is not in fact particularly opaque, but the information conveyed says much more about the entity doing the generation and the time at which the generation is done, than it does anything about the resource identified. For that reason, users rightfully tend to think of UUIDs as more opaque than http URIs. Indeed, one of the great complications in using UUIDs in certain applications is the lack of convenient ability to generate them uniquely on systems that lack network capability (and thus MAC addresses). They are not pseudo-random 128 bit numbers. Noah [1] http://www.iso.org/iso/en/CatalogueDetailPage.CatalogueDetail?CSNUMBER=2229&scopelist= [2] http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gorry/course/lan-pages/mac-vendor-codes.html -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 --------------------------------------
Received on Saturday, 26 February 2005 03:31:45 UTC