Re: #1047 Path-identity: A proposal (perhaps)

[Richard Clayton <richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In message <B1567455A8003F858BE0F033@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes

> Traditional usage has had two means of generating unique identifiers:
> DNS names and asserted identities. The first gets its uniqueness from
> the DNS; the second gets its uniqueness from tradition. New servers
> should use DNS names.

Not terribly important, but since the majority of the traditional names
that occur in the "middle" of paths derive from UUCP (the ones at the
ends are more of a mixture, but still mainly UUCP) could we change the
second sentence to finish...

...  "gets its uniqueness from tradition, mainly from when articles were
carried over UUCP."

which at least gives a clue (something to Google on) as why the
tradition arose and why it is no longer sustainable.

- -- 
richard                                              Richard Clayton

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.         Benjamin Franklin

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1

iQA/AwUBQsKbapoAxkTY1oPiEQL4wgCeNsSPuw91T5Rh5y3ggmEB8AJ4suYAoNZb
2mUPgsTe/iHtvQQUemyWlceV
=x4pR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----