Re: X.500, Naming and the Internet

[Tim Howes <[e-mail]>]

In general, I support Weng on the listing vs. registration debate.
The listing model is the way to go.

> Instead, I would like to propose the following:
> 
> - the official sanctioning of o=Internet (or cn=Internet,
> or addmd=Internet) at the root. I believe that
> a very strong argument can be made to non-Internet
> Directory-operarators that the
> Internet is a truly international entity, and
> therefore deserving of being listed (or
> having a registration point) directly under the root.
> 
> - the placing of all Internet-centric information under
> o=Internet. This would definitely include the DNS,
> and may possibly include the quipu DSAs (there are a
> few other considerations there).

The DNS make sense to me, but quipu is not tied to the internet.
Why would quipu DSAs be named under o=Internet (unless they were
part of the internet pilot, maybe)?

> - assuming that consensus is for the listing model
> as I presented it, the development of a naming scheme
> for naming Internet-centric things in the Directory
> so that they can be listed outside of o=Internet.
> This could take the form of additional sections in
> OSI-DS 12.

I agree.

> Whether we run the tree under {o,cn,addmd,whatever}=Internet
> as a registration hierarchy or a listing hierarchy is another issue.
> I lean towards having it be a listing hierarchy, relieving the
> existing pilot operators of the registration function, and handing
> registration authority to some 'official' Internet authority.
> But it *is* another issue.

I vote to go with a listing model here too.  But it's perfectly
possible that the IANA (or whoever) may choose to use X.500 as
their registry.  That would certainly make things simpler.

> ... So, do I get a prize for what must be one of the longest messages
> ever sent to osi-ds?? :-) :-)

So awarded.  That's two now!      -- Tim