To:
<budi@alliance.globalnetlink.com>, <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
"Brian W. Spolarich" <briansp@walid.com>
Date:
Wed, 31 Jan 2001 15:26:01 -0500
Importance:
Normal
In-Reply-To:
<200101302258.QAA21440@alliance.globalnetlink.com>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
RE: Merging RRP and Whois
| That's ok. Email address is unique and has nothing to do | with domain registration and such. Most people keep their | email addresses as their identities. As someone has already pointed out, e-mail addresses do not necessarily have the property of always binding to the same human (although no identifier really does). Dumb question: Instead of inventing new identifiers or bending existing ones in perhaps ungraceful ways, why not use a URL as the identifier? If the protocol specified LDAP as the transport protocol then LDAP DNs would serve nicely. Maybe I'm misinterpreting this thread (I've only started following this proto-WG and haven't yet digested the mail archives completely), but it seems like there's a tendency in the IETF to invent Yet Another Protocol, which at this point seems unnecessary. If a URN resolution mechanism were to be deployed (i.e. NAPTR), then this seems like a good place to use URNs as well. Apparently Michael Mealling thinks so too, according to RFC3043. :-)