Re: [salud] AD review of draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-12

[[e-mail] (Dale R. Worley)]

> From: Richard Barnes <[e-mail]>
>
> > > It's not clear to me why you need all the date machinery in
> > > provider IDs.  This things are ephemeral -- why not just use the
> > > org that has the domain now?
> 
> Fair enough.  Just wondering if we could simplify things, but it sounds
> like not.  Thanks!

> From: Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]>

> There was quite a lot of thought and effort put into 
> the details of how the semantics are specified, and on the syntax, to 
> make it as convenient as possible to use. (E.g., what the defaults are.)

More explicitly:  If the date for a domain name is omitted, it
defaults to 2013-01-01, and that date is usable by any organization
which possessed its domain name on that date, or any organization
which acquires a new domain name in the future which was never owned
before.  The intention is to allow all existing telecomm equipment
vendors to be able to avoid using dates, and probably most vendors
that will be created in the future (if they're careful about choosing
a domain name).

Also, if a vendor's ownership of its domain name extends across Jan 1
of any year (and we expect that will be universal), they can use the
date 20xx-01-01, and that date can be abbreviated to just "xx".  That
shortens the date specifier to four characters, "(xx)", which we
consider is a reasonable overhead to trade for adhering to strict
time-invariance for URNs.

Dale