# Re: URNs in the DNS

Martin Hamilton (M.T.Hamilton@lut.ac.uk)
Fri, 16 Jul 1993 10:23:43 +0100 (BST)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Mitra: "Re: URNs in the DNS"
- Previous message: Martin Hamilton: "Re: URNs in the DNS"
- In reply to: Steve Putz: "Re: URNs in the DNS"
- Next in thread: rv@deins.informatik.uni-dortmund.de: "Re: URNs in the DNS"
- Reply: rv@deins.informatik.uni-dortmund.de: "Re: URNs in the DNS"

    Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1993 10:23:43 +0100 (BST)

    From: Martin Hamilton <M.T.Hamilton@lut.ac.uk>

    Subject: Re: URNs in the DNS

    To: Steve Putz <putz@parc.xerox.com>

    In-Reply-To: <93Jul15.104945pdt.2445@spoggles.parc.xerox.com>

    Message-Id: <Pine.3.07.9307160933.B5963-a100000@lust>

> I am distressed by your reference to URNs as "semi-permanent things". I
> hope this does not mean that it is ok for a URN to depend on some less
> stable name space (like internet host names which sometimes get reused).

There's a dichotomy between the desire to keep URNs forever and
the necessity (as I see it, anyway :-) of delegating authority for
them -- you have to rely on the maintainers of the URN
repositories not to do thoughtless things like go bust, or get
merged with other organisations, or change the name of theirs, or...

Perhaps I have this wrong though -- is delegation essential?
If so, any scheme for implementing URNs would probably have to
include a "dead URN" scenario, involving the transfer of
responsibility for the URN in question to another registration
authority. How does that sound?

Without delegation? Well, Joyce Reynolds is going to be just a
*little* busy!

Martin

- Next message: Mitra: "Re: URNs in the DNS"
- Previous message: Martin Hamilton: "Re: URNs in the DNS"
- In reply to: Steve Putz: "Re: URNs in the DNS"
- Next in thread: rv@deins.informatik.uni-dortmund.de: "Re: URNs in the DNS"
- Reply: rv@deins.informatik.uni-dortmund.de: "Re: URNs in the DNS"