Re: future of identifiers

Patrik Fältström <> Tue, 29 October 2013 16:04 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CA4211E8197 for <>; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 09:04:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.3
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kf+8OL3vbTpL for <>; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 09:04:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a02:80:3ffe::176]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1427C11E829B for <>; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 09:03:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown [IPv6:2001:13c7:7003:89:412b:1f27:b2f8:c2e4]) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9DD7420521; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 17:03:52 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_1FDC6131-323D-4BE9-9D4C-9F42DD2ECB64"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1816\))
Subject: Re: future of identifiers
From: Patrik Fältström <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 12:03:43 -0400
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: Jari Arkko <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1816)
Cc: " Discussion" <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 16:04:09 -0000

On 29 okt 2013, at 10:38, Jari Arkko <> wrote:

> I have some ideas on what some of these trends might be. But what do the rest of you think? Where is identifier technology going, and what new things are on the horizon? What do we need to do with IDNs? DNSSEC? What will DANE lead to, and how will id-locator split techniques evolve & be deployed? How will applications or users think about identifiers in the future?
> More information at

I think it is important to not restart discussions already held regarding different requirements on identifiers, requirements that in turn lead to various alternatives on how they are allocated, managed and resolved. I do not think one can have one identifier that fits all. Instead multiple kind of identifiers are needed. Because of requirements on uniqueness (absolute, low risk of collisions or not needed at all), persistence, human readable/understandable, whether allocation and resolution should be designed for read (lookups) or write (allocation), what the identifier is to be used for (see id/loc discussions).