Re: X.500, Naming and the Internet

[Christian Huitema <[e-mail]>]

>I think we're using the word "listing" with two different meanings.
>When I used "listing" in my message, I was referring to the act
>of reflecting existing registrations in the DIT.
>
>You appear (please correct this if its wrong) to be using "listing" in
>the context of obtaining a dump of a portion of the DIT.

No. I use "listing" as the joint decision of a data base server and a client
to "list" information on the client, including its "registered name", in the
server's data base, so that these informations can be queried by the server's
subscriber. This is the same acceptation of "listing" as e.g. the NADF
forum. And the rationale is the same: user information is a value-added
service, that should not be "regulated". There shall not be a requirement
that all data bases look the same, nor that the description of a given entry
in all data bases look the same. And there shall not be a regulation that
e.g. a French server should only "list" French organizations.

Listing organization by geographical attributes is a perfectly valid
activity. However, geographical distribution of information will never tell
you e.g. the list of universities where one could prepare a master in
computer communication...


>                    For example, if we decide to shorten "Performance
>Systems International" to "PSI" for use in the Directory, how do
>we differentiate between my employer and "Plumbing Systems Incorporated".
>Who gets to use "PSI as the "database key" in the Directory?

Well, that is an old argument. You are saying that the names shall be
determined by the registration authority, and I am agreeing to that: we
shall use registered names. Then, you are adding that the "natural"
registration instrument is the legal registry of companies held by cities,
chambers of commerce, tax office -- whatever, it changes with national laws.
At this point, I somewhat disagree: this is just one way to register. The
important point is that registration should guarantee uniqueness; there are
many ways to achieve this, including ad-hoc registration authority. For
example, INRIA can validly claim the OID { iso member afnor(250)
organisations(1) inria(2) }. That is as good a name as anything else.

A name is not there to be searched: that is what data bases and keyword are
for. A name is mostly useful to provide you fast access to an up to date
data base, for efficient retrieval of "fast moving" (sort of) informations
such as addresses.

Christian Huitema