[Nml-wg] Volatility of urn:ogf:network identifiers

[Jason Zurawski]

Hey Freek/All;

I agree with your synopsis below, and would prefer to see the added 
information be date based.  My only other thought here is if 'year' is 
granular enough?  Should month/day be included too?

Other than that, go forward with the idea.

Thanks;

-jason

On 12/12/11 5:39 AM, thus spake Freek Dijkstra:
> Hello,
>
> At OGF 33 in Lyon we discussed the potential problem that
> urn:ogf:network identifiers are somewhat volatile.
> The IETF requires that URN must never be re-assigned or re-used. The
> currently proposed syntax (and prior practice) uses domain names to
> identify the organisation that assigned a URN. Domain names may be
> re-assigned, so there is a risk that URNs in the proposed syntax may be
> re-assigned or re-used.
>
> I personally consider identifier collisions unlikely, but possible in
> archives with historic measurement data.
>
> The participants in the OGF 33 discussion generally agreed that we
> should look into fixing this.
>
> The usual solution to prevent identifier collisions is to set up a
> registry that assigns prefixes. E.g. IANA has a registry for URN
> namespaces, ICANN for top level domain names, CNRI has a registry for
> the Handle system, etc.
>
> Most of the discussion was aimed how to create a registry within the
> OGF. A few possible identifiers that identify the organisation that
> assigns URNs were discussed:
>       - DNS name          - the current syntax. e.g. "sara.nl"
>       - organisation name - e.g. "SARA"
>       - DNS + version     - e.g. "sara.nl:1"
>       - DNS + year        - e.g. "sara.nl:2011"
>
> I personally hope it is possible to re-use an existing registry, so that
> the OGF does not need to create a registry on its own. Examples of
> current registries are AS-numbers and DNS.
>      - DNS can be used, but is consider volatile. (RFC 3406 explicitly
>        states that domain names "makes a poor URN namespace in practice")
>      - AS-number do not work, since not all organisations that want to
>        assign urn:ogf:network identifiers have a AS number  (e.g. many
>        Dutch universities do not have their own AS number as they only
>        have one upstream provider, SURFnet).
>
> Of the above examples,
>       - organisation name - e.g. "SARA"
>       - DNS + version     - e.g. "sara.nl:1"
> require a new registry within the OGF
>
>       - DNS name          - e.g. "sara.nl"
> is considered volatile
>
> I claim that using a domain name + year
>   1) is not volatile
>   2) does not require a new registry within the OGF
>
> A domain name is volatile because it can be reassigned. However, a
> domain name is typically not re-assigned within a year (if only because
> registration fees are usually paid per year, not per month). Hence, the
> combination of year and domain name is a unique identifier for an
> organisation.
>
> Hence, I propose the following syntax for urn:ogf:network identifiers
> (in ABFR format):
>
>     "urn:ogf:network:" DOMAINNAME ":" ASSIGNINGYEAR ":" SNSS
>
> where
>    DOMAINNAME = a FQDN that is administratively owned by the organisation
> that assigns the URN
>    ASSIGNINGYEAR = year (gregorian calendar) whent he URN is first
> assigned (note that once a URN is assigned, this number does not change
> for that URN.)
>    SNSS = subnamespace specific string. The remainder of the URN that
> only has meaning for the assigning organisation and should not be
> interpreted by other organisations.
>
> Regards,
> Freek
>
> _______________________________________________
> nml-wg mailing list
> nml-wg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org//mailman/listinfo/nml-wg