RE: Proposed amendment to language of draft-ietf-url-procedures

And what we are attempting to do, sir, is to provide the process for an IANA
registry -- in such a manner that does not create the frenetic free-for-all
we've seen in DNS.  (I trust you are aware that the DNS situation is
considered a "problem".)  

I will not address your other comments.  I am always open to constructive
suggestions on how to solve the problems within this Working Group's scope.


Ian King <[email protected]>
Quality Assurance, Speech Product Group
Intelligent Interface Technologies
MICROSOFT CORPORATION 

-----Original Message-----
From: Masataka Ohta [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, September 13, 1999 12:21 AM
To: Ian King
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]
Subject: RE: Proposed amendment to language of draft-ietf-url-procedures


Ian;

> Then what do you suggest to provide collision management, identification
and
> interoperability in URL schemes?

Huh?

How, do you think, IANA is managing collisons, identifications
and interoperability of TCP port numbers?

> If you feel you have a viable alternative, that would prevent namespace
> collision, encourage development of interoperable standards, and provide
> sensible management of this highly visible namespace

DNS has a purely technical mechanism to enforce unique assignment
through well known single set of root servers, even which can be
ignored by local conventions.

URL does not.

> -- I'm all ears.  

You only have to see the real world.

> But a lot of very intelligent folks have discussed
> this matter for a long time, and this is what they came up with.

You seems to have a very strange definition of intelligence.

							Masataka Ohta