To:
George Belotsky <george@register.com>
Cc:
Bill Manning <bmanning@isi.edu>, michaelm@netsol.com, Hollenbeck Scott <shollenbeck@verisign.com>, ietf-provreg@cafax.se
From:
Michael Mealling <michael@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:
Mon, 12 Mar 2001 15:05:57 -0500
In-Reply-To:
<20010312143731.B14666@register.com>; from george@register.com on Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 02:37:31PM -0500
Reply-To:
michaelm@netsol.com
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
User-Agent:
Mutt/1.1.2i
Subject:
Re: Unique handle generation
On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 02:37:31PM -0500, George Belotsky wrote: > A digest can be used as a handle. A composite built up of atomics > (UUID-style) can be used as input to the digest function. The > handle's owner still has the easy to remember representation, > which they can share or keep from whoever they like. > > As I said in a previous post, the digest solution does provide > a measure of security. Additional benefits are consistency of > representation, and proper enforcement of access control. The digest > handle is opaque. I cannot get any information from such a handle by > itself. The main drawback from this is that it becomes a flat namespace. If you find an identifier you either have to ask everyone who has it or have some 'database in the sky' that contains all of the identifiers. This may or may not be an issues. It really depends on how often you'll be attempting to deal with 'naked' and unknown/foreign identifiers. I'm not intimate enought with the problem space to know if its an issue... -MM -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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