Re: [RAM] Re: Ramblings about "locator"

    > From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>

    > This seems wrong to me.
    > Given any identifier we care to define, someone can later come along
    > and decide to "route" to that over some scope.

Exactly.

    > If that changes the "identifier" into an "address" or a "locator" then
    > the terms do not refer to the name but to the combination on the name
    > and the way it happens to be used, at the moment.

Good point.

    > a locator is a naming string (binary or otherwise) that changes when
    > you change location

Exactly.

    > an identifier is a naming string that does not change when one changes
    > location.

This seems like a plausible definition to me. (It leaves out any notion of
*what* is being named, but that's OK with me.) All these two terms ("locator"
and "identifier") would now signify would be choices along that one
'location' axis which I have previously discussed.

    > a locator is where given several such things some notions of distance
    > (closeness, relative topological placement) can be applied to the
    > entities based on those locators.

Exactly.

	Noel

_______________________________________________
RAM mailing list
RAM@iab.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram