Re: Unique handle generation

[Michael Mealling <michael@bailey.dscga.com>]

On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 12:17:49PM -0500, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand the point you're trying to make in the context of
> admin repository changes over time.
> 
> What happens to your example handle if the admin function is one day moved
> from ARIN to some other administrative entity (call it !ARIN for the sake of
> argument), but the person and prefix remain constant?  Does the handle
> remain WM110-ARIN, or must it change to WM110-!ARIN?

And if the two elements have meaning (which making them atomic suggests)
then you end up needing to ensure that both are globally unique since
I'd bet there would be a WM110 in the new entity pointing to someone else...

-MM

> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Bill Manning [mailto:bmanning@ISI.EDU]
> >Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 12:05 PM
> >To: shollenbeck@verisign.com
> >Cc: pgeorge@saraf.com; ietf-provreg@cafax.se
> >Subject: Re: Unique handle generation
> >
> >
> > some time back (last week) I mentioned that each object has its own
> >handle. One of those objects is the administrative repository. We have
> >documented evidence that administrative repositories have changed while
> >the objects it has chosen to imbed have not changed. 
> >
> >Please consider that some "handles" are a concatination of "atomic"
> >handles. e.g.
> >
> >Person:  WM110
> >Admin Repository: ARIN
> >	these two are concatinated to form WM110-ARIN and that composite
> >	is bound to:
> >---
> >Prefix: 192.168.0.0/16

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling	|      Vote Libertarian!       | www.rwhois.net/michael
Sr. Research Engineer   |   www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett     | ICQ#:         14198821
Network Solutions	|          www.lp.org          |  michaelm@netsol.com