Subject: Last Call: Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) to Proposed Standard

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 19:55:16 -0500

The IESG has received a request from the Uniform Resource Names Working
Group to consider the following Internet-Drafts as Proposed Standards:

 o Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)
        <draft-ietf-urn-ddds-03.txt>

 o A DDDS Database Using The Domain Name System
        <draft-ietf-urn-dns-ddds-database-02.txt>

 o URI Resolution using the Dynamic Delegation Discovery System
        <draft-ietf-urn-uri-res-ddds-02.txt>

Together, they will obsolete RFC2915 and RFC2168.

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action.  Please send any comments to the
[email-masked] or [email-masked] mailing lists by December 8, 2000.

Files can be obtained via
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-urn-ddds-03.txt
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-urn-dns-ddds-database-02.txt
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-urn-uri-res-ddds-02.txt

---

From: Masataka Ohta <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 09:08:51 +0859

>       <draft-ietf-urn-uri-res-ddds-02.txt>

It seems to me that the proposal uses DNS to resolve URN.

However, it involves locations of nameservers of related domainnames
that URNs are now URLs.

One may argue that domainnames are location independent. Then, all the
URLs (without raw IP addresses) are URNs.

For URLs, HTTP has far more flexible redirection mechanism than the
regexp based proposal. More flexibility than regexp is essential
for highly semantical entities like URNs.

                                        Masataka Ohta

---

From: Patrik Fältström <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 07:38:18 +0100

>It seems to me that the proposal uses DNS to resolve URN.

It is _one_ proposed algorithm to use to resolve URN's. The
persistence of URN's are given by allowing other algorithms aswell --
which do not have anything to do with DNS.

    paf

--

---

From: Leslie Daigle <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 12:40:26 -0500

Comments in-line:

> It seems to me that the proposal uses DNS to resolve URN.

As Patrik has pointed out -- this is one proposal.

> However, it involves locations of nameservers of related domainnames

No -- the domain name is not part of the URN identifier string.
Any relationship between a URN and a domain name is made with
information that is current at the time the URN is resolved, not
the time the identifier is assigned.  Thus, such a relationship
can be adjusted by namespace management without perturbing assigned
URNs.

> URLs (without raw IP addresses) are URNs.

No, URNs are defined (syntactically) in RFC2141.

That URLs may benefit from this approach to resolution is indeed
outlined in

> for highly semantical entities like URNs.

Yes -- once you find the server that knows about the resource; which
will often fail if the domain in the HTTP url goes away -- try
to find where the resource http://www.bunyip.com/research/index.html
is today...

I hope this clarifies things.  If not, there are 4.5 years of
working group archives that might contain more specific detail.

Thanks,
Leslie.

--

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Days used to be longer."
   -- ThinkingCat

Leslie Daigle
[email-masked]
-------------------------------------------------------------------