Re: I-D Action:draft-duerst-iana-namespace-00.txt

[Mark Nottingham <[e-mail]>]

Details:
   http://www.w3.org/blog/systeam/2008/02/08/w3c_s_excessive_dtd_traffic

Personally, if I had to serve this traffic, I'd put a highly- 
concurrent Web server (e.g., Lighttpd) in place and build a one-second 
+ delay into serving those responses. Fine for human use, but will  
motivate software authors to find out why things suddenly got so slow...

Beyond that, question: how many IETF specs use a namespace URI as the  
primary means of identifying the format/protocol? As opposed to a  
media type. My suspicion is that the number is fairly small. If that's  
the case, I wonder if there's a need for these URIs to be resolvable.

Cheers,


On 19/02/2008, at 6:01 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I'm adding IANA and Thomas Narten (author of IANA considerations  
>> docs) to this thread to get early IANA feedback about this idea.   
>> It may well be a good idea, but we definitely want to think it  
>> through:
>> - A registry for HTTP URLs in the IANA domain
>>   ... including a HTML or XML document hosted by IANA on its  
>> Website at the location specified in the registered URL
>>  ... which means that end-users and developers will use these URIs,  
>> perhaps very frequently
>> What do we know about the W3 experience hosting namespace URIs with  
>> actual documents at the URIs?  I've been hearing rumours lately  
>> about something like this causing expensive levels of traffic, but  
>> I can't recall the details.
>> ...
>
> That was about DTDs (fetched by XML parsers), not namespace documents.
>
> BR, Julian


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/