Kyle;
> There seems to be a debate to split "DNS" from "Directory" services,
> whereas, in long term, it is inevitable that DNS will merge with
> Directory services, even if current technology isn't that way.
Huh?
URLs are the result of such merge.
URLs have ASCII domain name part followed by
#x27;; Durah, Kheder; Randy Bush; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Internationalization and the IETF
I hate to butt in here, I've been listening to these discussions for
some time. (I am incredibly impressed with how smart everyone in these
IETF groups is).
But, what ab
I hate to butt in here, I've been listening to these discussions for
some time. (I am incredibly impressed with how smart everyone in these
IETF groups is).
But, what about NMS directories that contain devices (non-computer),
physical
location, automations, histories, provisioning, and acquisit
Here is my contribution to the requested definitions.
--
Directory service = a software system that responds to requests for information about
entities, e.g. people in an organization. It's a system for managing access to
computer resources, keeping track of the users of a network,... from a si
At/À 05:06 2000-12-12 -0800, Bill Manning you wrote/vous écriviez:
>%
>% For the sake of a good discussion can we please have a
>% definition of "directory service" and "address
>% registry" to make sure we are all on the same page.
>%
>% I think we will find that defining these may be the
>% issu
An attempt at writing down a reasonably self-consistent set of definitions
occured in draft-alvestrand-directory-defs (currently expired).
A new version was posted to the open discussion list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a few days ago.
I suggest we move the discussion of those definitions there.
At 07:
At 05:40 AM 12/12/00 -0800, Gabriel Landowski wrote:
>For the sake of a good discussion can we please have a
>definition of "directory service" and "address
>registry" to make sure we are all on the same page.
A Lookup, mapping, or address registry service takes a complete, precise
query specifi
%
% For the sake of a good discussion can we please have a
% definition of "directory service" and "address
% registry" to make sure we are all on the same page.
%
% I think we will find that defining these may be the
% issue, and this will clarify the discussion to
% something that we can get
ectory
> service.
>
> RGDS
>
> Kheder Durah, Ph.D.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2000 7:16 PM
> To: Randy Bush
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> [EMAIL PROTECTED];
>
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000 23:55:50 PST, "Durah, Kheder" said:
> I see what you mean..it's not a perfect world and misuse of technology
> standards always exist as long as human intelligence is involved. Do you
> think going the other way and considering DNS as an directory service will
> resolve this is
up on International Agriculture
Research(CGIAR)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 9:48 AM
To: Durah, Kheder
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Internationalization and the IETF
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000 23:25:25 PST, &
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000 23:25:25 PST, "Durah, Kheder" said:
> This is my first transmission to IETF, and would like to second the fact
> that DNS is an address registry and not a directory service.
It's all fine and good to insist that sort of thing until you're blue in
the face, but the reality is t
To: Randy Bush
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Internationalization and the IETF
As I recall, didn't we (members of the IETF list) almost have a holy (flame)
war, about wheather DNS was a directory service about 6 month
00 08:49:24 PM
Sent by: Randy Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Bill Manning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim
Stephenson-Dunn/C/HQ/3Com)
Subject: Re: Internationalization and the IETF
> Buzzt. 1000 times on the chauk bo
At 01:53 PM 12/8/00 -0800, Gabriel Landowski wrote:
>Why not alias the ASCII to the numeral form?
What is the benefit of having the numeric form all, since we already have a
common form (ascii)?
d/
=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Brandenburg Consulting
Tel: +1.408.246.8253, Fax
> Buzzt. 1000 times on the chauk board:
> The DNS is not a directory service...
but it's an address registry?
--- Dave Crocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If we did not already have very wide-scale use of
> ascii, it might be worth
> considering numerals as the common form. But that
> wide-scale use is
> everywhere.
Why not alias the ASCII to the numeral form?
Gabriel Landowski
Mindangle, USA
___
% that's not obvious either. If I want to call you, I have to track down your
% phone number. I can't just call the operator and say "connect me to Anthony
% Atkielski". But I can find your email address pretty quickly with a web
% browser, and atkielski.com isn't too hard to come by.
Buzzt.
At 02:43 PM 12/7/00 +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
>Not a valid comparison. Do we have a worldwide, global phonebook that lists
>every telephone number on the planet?
yes. we call it "411". If the operator doesn't have the information, s/he
redirects you to someone who does.
>Do we have telep
At 15:09 07/12/2000 -0600, Matt Crawford wrote:
> > If the world had asked you or me to design an international
> > language, I think either of us would have done better.
>
>Don't be too sure. Even today, there are no more speakers of
>Esperanto than of Mayan.
Take care.
The SIL Ethnologue cla
At 09:06 AM 12/7/00 -0600, Robert G. Ferrell wrote:
>I would hazard a guess that the vast majority
>of Internet message addressing is done automatically through the use of
>bookmarks/hyperlinks or email address books, anyway.
This line of reasoning has shown up regularly for 20 years, or so. Ye
> Yes. 555-1212 (and it's regional equivalents).
No. That number only works in certain places, for certain numbers, not
everywhere for everything.
> It's still name-to-address mapping.
But it is not universal and worldwide.
DNS may represent the same oversight that IP addressing schemes have
> If the world had asked you or me to design an international
> language, I think either of us would have done better.
Don't be too sure. Even today, there are no more speakers of
Esperanto than of Mayan.
Vernon;
> > MIME character sets is an example of a battle fought and won.
>
> When MIME is used to pass special forms among people whose common
> understandings including more or other than ASCII, MIME is a battle
> fought and won.
FYI, we, Japanese, have, long before MIME, been and still are
e
> From: Henk Langeveld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> You know, it isn't that long ago that I realised that for many Americans,
> "International" is synonymous with "Non-American".
That is as true as the observation that many who learn English as a
second language think that "international" is synonymou
> Not a valid comparison. Do we have a worldwide, global phonebook that lists
> every telephone number on the planet? No.
Yes. 555-1212 (and it's regional equivalents).
> Do we have telephones with
> keyboards into which you type a name instead of a number? No.
Instead, we have voice-enable
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Umm.. No. We haven't. You got a phone book in your
> > office? Ever dialed 555-1212?
> Not a valid comparison. Do we have a worldwide, global phonebook that lists
> every telephone number on the planet? No. Do we hav
[recipient list trimmed]
> Look at other international communications systems, like TELEX and EDI
> (Electronic Data Interchange). Why are they so "universal"?
they aren't. both are used by a limited number of people within a
limited set of business interests, as compared to the Internet.
>
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Umm.. No. We haven't. You got a phone book in your
> office? Ever dialed 555-1212?
Not a valid comparison. Do we have a worldwide, global phonebook that lists
every telephone number on the planet? No. Do we have telephones with
keyboards into which you type a nam
On Thu, 07 Dec 2000 17:09:16 +0100, Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> We've done without it thus far for telephone numbers, and that does not seem
> to have hampered their use and availability.
Umm.. No. We haven't. You got a phone book in your office? Ever dialed
555-1212? ;)
--
On Thu, 07 Dec 2000 09:06:41 CST, "Robert G. Ferrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> bookmarks/hyperlinks or email address books, anyway. It might be a hassle in
> the original contact to have to type in a sequence of numbers, but
> after that it's back to point and click.
Until the destination
From: "Robert G. Ferrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Maybe in the long run we just won't need domain name translation.
We've done without it thus far for telephone numbers, and that does not seem
to have hampered their use and availability.
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 07:23:11 -0500
From: Dave Crocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
At least the recipient has the unintelligible data well isolated and
labeled. MIME did its job.
Indeed. If I get a mail message which is in HTML only, 99.97% of the
time it's SPAM-mail. And I've lost cou
Keith Moore wrote:
> Furthermore, a
> great many people use multiple languages (not necessarily including
> English) is, so that a given person, host, or subnetwork will often
> need to exist in multiple (potentially competing) locales at once.
Sometimes even in the same sentence. My mother gre
Keith Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>The notion that use of languages other than English can or should be
>'localized' strikes me as both shockingly arrogant and hopelessly naive.
It strikes me that the underlying assumption that people can't or won't
deal with numeric addresses may no lon
The notion that use of languages other than English can or should be
'localized' strikes me as both shockingly arrogant and hopelessly naive.
People can and will use their own languages on the Internet - in email,
on the web, and in domain names, and without regard to their location
in either
At 01:58 AM 12/7/00 -0700, Vernon Schryver wrote:
> > From: Harald Alvestrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > it may have escaped the notice of some that a fair bit of the
> discussion on
> > diacritcs was carried out using live examples,
>
>Diacritical marks are no different from Cyrillic, Arabic, Greek
> From: Harald Alvestrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >The same thinking that says that MIME Version headers make sense in
> >general IETF list mail also says that localized alphabets and glyphs must
> >be used in absolutely all contexts, including those that everyone must
> >use and so would expect to
38 matches
Mail list logo
