[governance] IGF and TLDs

[Avri Doria]

On 29 Jun 2010, at 22:44, JFC Morfin wrote:

> The main problem created by the ISOCANN enhanced cooperation lonesome attitude is their lack of interoperability with other URI resolution systems.

not really,  if someone defines other naming schemes (have participated in defining one myself: draft-irtf-dtnrg-dtn-uri-scheme/draft-davies-dtnrg-uri-find -  drafts currently out of date) and builds the servers and end-system code to support it, they may do anything they can do.

no one is stopping anyone from defining another naming system according to rfc3986 and the protocols that go along with it.  it is just that there is no uptake for it at the moment (or even research support as far as i can tell).

and if someone builds a real system out in the world that really works and really starts to reach decent deployments levels (for some value of decent) the gateways and interop will happen.  they always do.

a.____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t