RE: Unique handle generation

["Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrik Fältström [mailto:paf@cisco.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 2:13 AM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott; ietf-provreg@cafax.se
> Subject: RE: Unique handle generation
> 
> 
> At 19.49 -0500 01-03-09, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> >The requirements draft currently states that every object 
> must be associated
> >with a unique identifier, but it doesn't specifically define 
> the format of
> >the identifier(s).  It's that "what the protocol should do" 
> (in scope) vs.
> >the "how the protocol should do it" (out of scope) thing again.
> 
> What do you mean by unique? Locally in the registrar? In the 
> Registry? In the world? Should the handle change when an object is 
> moved between registrars? Should the handle be able to not only 
> identify the object but also where the object is?
> 
> I.e. a bit more specific requirements would help. It is the lack of 
> answers to these questions the discussion on the syntax is so hard.

OK, I see your point.  In an earlier message you suggested some requirements
for handles; let me try to capture those thoughts (and some mentioned by
others) more precisely:

1. Every object MUST have an associated handle.

2. An object handle MUST be globally unique.

3. An object's handle MUST NOT change during the lifetime of an object, even
if administrative control of the object changes over time.

4. An object handle MUST contain information that unambiguously identifies
both the object and the object's administrative repository.

5. Handle format SHOULD be easily parsed by humans.

Does anyone object to having these added to the requirements draft?

<Scott/>