On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Graham Leggett <minf...@sharp.fm> wrote: > On 07 Feb 2018, at 8:36 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > > But there is no argument for a name identifier >255 characters ... the cited > RFC > and the filesystem and so many others use this as the conventional > constraint > on an identifier. > > Why double that? > > > Because the part of the URL that matters to the admin might be at the end, > as in Dirk’s example. If we’ve consumed the whole length on the hostname, we > leave nothing for the URL itself. > > Eg: https://very-very-long-hostname/foo/bar/baz/veryimportant1 and > https://very-very-long-hostname/foo/bar/baz/veryimportant2 > > The burning question is - are these fields only used for debugging, and > therefore an approximation is fine, or are they used for something else > where precision is required?
In order to find the slot, we need to strcmp. 512 is arbitrary, does this become an 8192 byte identifier? Or do we insist people distill names to fit into a schema, much like DNS or file names, as the *identifier*?
