Re: OID document from Arles

Skip Slone <jpslone@tag.den.mmc.com> Wed, 22 July 1992 16:31 UTC

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 09:17:40 -0600
From: Skip Slone <jpslone@tag.den.mmc.com>
Message-Id: <9207221517.AA14122@tag>
To: Sylvain.Langlois@der.edf.fr
Subject: Re: OID document from Arles
Cc: c.robbins@xtel.co.uk, osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk, tim@terminator.cc.umich.edu

> 
> From Sylvain.Langlois@der.edf.fr Tue Jul 21 05:35:31 1992
> Subject: Re: OID document from Arles 
> In-Reply-To: jpslone@tag.den.mmc.com's message of Mon, 20 Jul 92 08:36:37 -0600.
> 
> > Its purpose to enable the use of OIDs as a sort of "short form name,"
> > rather than find out information about the OID itself.  Perhaps it could
> > be used that way in some indirect fashion, though.
> Agreed, but I'm pretty sure  we can use  it for other  purposes (or at
> least take some inspiration from it).
> 

There are all sorts of possibilities (alternative name spaces, index
trees, what-have-you) that can spring from implementing aliases
in the "saw-tooth" fashion shown in that document.  For '92 and
beyond, the removal of the restriction on aliasing aliases, coupled
with the useAliasOnUpdate service control, adds yet another
dimension.

As I recall, there wasn't a whole lot of discussion of that document
at Arles, so there's not much insight to be gained there.  Everyone
was pretty much worn out by another, more controversial, issue
by the time this document came up.

-- Skip

Re: OID document from Arles Skip Slone