Re: [RAI] Global Service Provider ID - draft-pfautz-service-provider-identifier-urn-01

"Worley, Dale R (Dale)" <dworley@avaya.com> Fri, 23 September 2011 15:24 UTC

Return-Path: <dworley@avaya.com>
X-Original-To: rai@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rai@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C71221F8C9D for <rai@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 08:24:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.473
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.473 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.126, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GwO1H+A+4lP8 for <rai@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 08:24:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16ACF21F8C7D for <rai@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 08:24:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EAO2kfE6HCzI1/2dsb2JhbABCqBN4gVMBAQEBAgESbAsCAQgNCDEyJQEBBAESCBqHVpssAptNhiFgBJkRjA4
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,430,1312171200"; d="scan'208";a="305388695"
Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.53]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 23 Sep 2011 11:26:38 -0400
Received: from unknown (HELO DC-US1HCEX3.global.avaya.com) ([135.11.52.22]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 23 Sep 2011 11:17:07 -0400
Received: from DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com ([169.254.2.172]) by DC-US1HCEX3.global.avaya.com ([135.11.52.22]) with mapi; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 11:26:37 -0400
From: "Worley, Dale R (Dale)" <dworley@avaya.com>
To: "PFAUTZ, PENN L" <pp3129@att.com>, "rai@ietf.org" <rai@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 11:26:37 -0400
Thread-Topic: [RAI] Global Service Provider ID - draft-pfautz-service-provider-identifier-urn-01
Thread-Index: Acx6AcDeNS0NeSsqR7m50XF38KY7vgAAjGr8
Message-ID: <CD5674C3CD99574EBA7432465FC13C1B222B1F5902@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com>
References: <38726EDA2109264987B45E29E758C4D6022778@MISOUT7MSGUSR9N.ITServices.sbc.com>
In-Reply-To: <38726EDA2109264987B45E29E758C4D6022778@MISOUT7MSGUSR9N.ITServices.sbc.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [RAI] Global Service Provider ID - draft-pfautz-service-provider-identifier-urn-01
X-BeenThere: rai@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Real-time Applications and Infrastructure \(RAI\)" <rai.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rai>, <mailto:rai-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rai>
List-Post: <mailto:rai@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rai-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rai>, <mailto:rai-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 15:24:17 -0000

> From: PFAUTZ, PENN L [pp3129@att.com]
> 
> The outstanding issues seemed to be
> 
> 1. Is a new resource assignment necessary for the URN or could an
> existing one, Private Enterprise Numbers or ITADs be used with a URN
> defined to provide a fixed length parameter as requested in the I-D?
> 
> 2. Assuming a fixed length parameter will be used, what’s the right
> length?

I am in favor of using one of the existing identifiers so as to avoid
the proliferation of registries.

Regarding the number of digits, I would suggest at least 10, to allow
the number of identifiable entities to exceed the population of the
earth.  This sounds amusing, but not too many years ago, the number of
possible IP addresses was less than the number of people on earth, and
that turned out to be insufficient.  (See RFC 814 for an early
discussion.)

In regard to current registration, about 1,500 ITADs and 40,000
private enterprise numbers have been assigned, which would not
seriously deplete either number space for these purposes.  A more
serious question is whether the administrative procedures of the IANA
are sufficient for the envisioned business purposes -- are there legal
requirements that would make it preferable to have assignment
implemented by another organization?

Dale