|
As a case in point, nobody really needed those
32 bit ip addresses with all that subnetting and such...
48 bit mac addresses (flat addressing, with hierarchical
subregistration for manufacturers) are surely sufficient...
And if not, then the 128 bit UUIDs of IDL/IIOP/msRPC
will certainly do, right?
Yes, flat works within a context.
Yes, directory weenies like me tend to create too many
contexts, and stack them hierarchically to support delegation.
Interestingly, what the world keeps returning to is a roughly
4 level stack:
some naming scheme (dns, joint-iso-ccitt, broadcast SMB or SAP)
some top level thing (o, .com or .co.uk, c=us, whatever)
some organizational association (aol.com, Visa, ietf.org)
some individual name (eer@, skip.slone@, etc).
Commerce has a similar hierarchy:
earth or government
industry or other community of interest
company individual
But flat don't work when you want to ask "earth" what "Ed's" email
address
is, and repeated attempts to make it work shouldn't be suffered
to survive.
E
=================
Ed Reed Reed-Matthews, Inc. +1 801 796 7065 http://www.Reed-Matthews.COMd >>> Stephen Kent <kent@xxxxxxx> 01/10/01 02:55PM >>> At 9:08 AM +0100 1/10/01, Michael Ströder wrote: > ><snip> > >=> People are used to flat name spaces. X.500 DNs does not work. Flat name spaces scale poorly, lead to confusion, and are thus not attractive in various ways. People do like flat name spaces, until they trip over the limitations they embody, then they complain and look for magic solutions. I've seen no appropriate magic for this problem. Steve |