Re: [dsii] Potential IETF Work Items

Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com> Wed, 15 August 2012 00:47 UTC

Return-Path: <ed.summers@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dsii@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dsii@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EF4821F8527 for <dsii@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:47:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.048
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.048 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.929, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o+TrU3oFujEY for <dsii@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:47:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-f172.google.com (mail-ob0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECEA321F8435 for <dsii@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by obbwc20 with SMTP id wc20so1487980obb.31 for <dsii@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=R++xsMF84E+ZaB/Vcor/6EbEMaUu/D4PPKE84+kRMMQ=; b=PnqypOgWu4Lx71qs037+aPx34huZQ7GbG4u+6ugeMNjRS6isHge13LspTmiGFnsxtl KfOrWwmZUz/B5kkItPkkyIEBQw/23kL/gVlIyLPCFlOD8AdFiHrl4K1sn9OxpwOvFxK0 gSOtZwyoYuBYzR8RuCE2TV8pjNpLubT+/z+Y3jN7mAUoc+bUD+VX7VX3KHLunknkGjps LDnOORpI5ulbmKqm45XaF6NPfLjflFLSvOKpFlh7TuWInRAz1KRZ8xY4K4KLFzp6DzKZ C0p3l3YOPgJLBMxRnMyM8UncWC1gt2wXvDe5t2Q247t7lLy/tDuqUd5d8n0Rgpb47K+5 vCyQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.60.6.167 with SMTP id c7mr9778oea.88.1344991627372; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: ed.summers@gmail.com
Received: by 10.60.10.37 with HTTP; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <502A98E3.4090401@nomountain.net>
References: <E1AB8352-7B89-4D5A-9B36-4872DF105392@vigilsec.com> <7F45CB6F-2FE2-4A25-8A18-C94674489E39@vigilsec.com> <502A753F.4010001@nomountain.net> <502A9559.1000206@mnt.se> <502A98E3.4090401@nomountain.net>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:47:07 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0WSybAvK3ztyBL4laxZZY8Jg9EU
Message-ID: <CABzDd=6jxgGffsr7QKejBsTqypohAVNGwd9kJVt45nVaDWndEQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>
To: dsii@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [dsii] Potential IETF Work Items
X-BeenThere: dsii@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dsii.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dsii>, <mailto:dsii-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dsii>
List-Post: <mailto:dsii@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dsii-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dsii>, <mailto:dsii-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 00:47:08 -0000

I wasn't at the BOF, but that won't stop me from chiming in :-)

I'm personally skeptical of digital library inspired efforts to create
identifier schemes and protocols that ultimately try to compete with
the URI, HTTP and DNS--work that has largely gone on here at the IETF
I might add. I find statements like the following to be a bit of a red
flag:

    Should the IETF specify conventions for paths of
    PIDs for data objects?  These might include location
    metadata, access policy, authentication methods,
    authentication credential, and so on.

The URL and HTTP already provide much of this. I think efforts like
the DSII should promote the use of existing standards that have made
the Web such a successful publishing platform. The degree to which
DSII goes it alone is the degree to which it will fizzle out, and go
unnoticed.

//Ed