Re: UUID version 6 proposal, initial feedback

["Theodore Y. Ts'o" <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, Feb 01, 2020 at 11:00:24AM -0800, Brad Peabody wrote:
> The issue being that many applications need something like a UUID but can't use
> an actual UUID for one reason or another (e.g. sorting properties,
> insufficient unguessability, too long, etc.); thus the new proposal.

Again, I'd urge you to consider that you should build on *top* of the
standard UUID spec, since there are already implementations that will
do the right thing as far as time-based and random-based UUID's (the
latter will provide all the unguessability you need) and then just
create a library which *transforms* the UUID into a convenient
encoding form that makes it be convenient for key-indexing, or a more
compact text encoding, etc.

There are already very good implementations for UUID generation, and
if you create something which re-invents the wheel at a spec level, it
will cause people to reinvent the wheel (possibly badly) at the
implementation level.

Cheers,

						- Ted