[urn] Re: Request for Registration of CTS namespace

[[e-mail]]

That is heloful to know as it sets a clear goal.

Do you think IANA could provide a repo that maps data namespaces to server URLs?

I use such a (private) repo to direct the programming APIs to the servers. The idea was to host that repo at the academy instead.

If IANA registers data namespaces, it might be a good idea to have the core repo located at IANA(?) and allow users to clone that(?)

(Technically it is a trivial key-value mapping)

--
Gesendet mit der GMX Mail App

Am 13.06.26, 04:46 schrieb "Dale R. Worley" <worley@http://ariadne.com" rel="nofollow">ariadne.com>:

tiepilab=http://40gmx.de" rel="nofollow">40gmx.de@http://dmarc.ietf.org" rel="nofollow">dmarc.ietf.org writes:
> I don't have a a full list. The namespaces that are connected to my
> project are listed at https://urncts.eu" rel="nofollow">https://urncts.eu.

That page lists 19 data namespaces, which shows that there is
significant user support for CTS.

> The registration process will be an interesting topic to discuss. I
> understand your comment in a way that leads to a central authority.
> My abstract idea is an open registration, hosted *somewhere* that
> works purely on FCFS without an authority that decides who may or may
> not register a new namespace as long as it does not collide. With the
> option to choose your registry similiar to how you can choose your DNS
> provider. Choosing your registry would also limit the harm that could
> arise from misuse.

We definitely need a registration system in order to ensure URN
uniqueness, which is a requirement of URN registration -- organizations
need to know what possible URNs they are allowed to create. If we get
an IANA registry established under "FCFS" policy, then there is no
restriction regarding who may register which new data namespace. Also,
registration with IANA would implicitly put each data namespace owner on
notice that they had to adhere to the registered CTS syntax.

And I do see it as a problem that we need to ensure the users of CTS
conform to the proper syntax.

It would be straightforward to establish an IANA registry. It would
take a great deal of work to establish a system with multiple
registrars. And it might not be possible to recruit multiple
registrars, whereas the IESG can direct IANA to operate a registry.

In regard to trusting IANA to carry out its duties correctly ... If IANA
doesn't function well, the Internet has many more problems than just
CTS.

Although if you see a way to do decentralized allocation of data
namespaces, I would like to see the details.

> Another issue with a central registry might come from the domain. It
> seems that the need to register namespaces is not very strong in the
> humanities :) . The problem with unregistered URNs would escalate
> further if new data sets appear without registration. A decentralised
> registry would eliminate this problem because then it is the users
> responsibility.

I don't think there is anything we can do about people creating CTS URNs
without proper registration, all we can do is create clear rules that
allow us to say that they are nonconforming.

> And finally I don't see, how a central registry could prevent
> "namespace brokers" from registering and selling namespaces to
> academic institutions. In a decentralised registry, this business
> model cannot appear.

I think the situation is similar to domain names, in that there are many
alternative forms of the name of an institution or project, and it is
unlikely that brokers will have speculatively registered all of them.

Dale