Subject: [URN] Doc on combining multiple RDS types

From: Justin Couch <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 22:34:50 +0800

Since Micheal has started the traffic again, I thought it would be
appropriate to make public mention of some docs that I've been
generating.

The main one that I'm seeking comments on is a document dealing with how
to go about implementing a resolving system that takes into account
multiple different RDS types (not just DNS). It covers basic impl
aspects such as how to order them, what requirements the library should
have and all that stuff. The main architectural influence is from the
hostname lookup system prevalent on unix boxen (/etc/hosts vs BIND vs
NIS). 

This all comes from my work with the Java implemenation stuff that I've
been doing (also publically available) that combines a file based
resolver with Micheal's DNS based code for transportability with mobile
computers. I expect to have a fully functional release on my website
tomorrow (v0.4 is currently there but contains many bugs. v0.5 is
feature complete and almost bug free).

The file can be found at

http://www.vlc.com.au/~justin/java/urn/multiple_rds.html

A second doc dealing with the file based RDS can be found at

http://www.vlc.com.au/~justin/java/urn/file_based_resolver.html

If you view the URL minus the file, you'll see a listing of the
currently available code. Stay tuned for the announcement hopefully
tomorrow. 

BTW - anyone object to me using the package namespace of org.ietf.uri ?
I can't release it under my work package struture so that was the next
best alternative.... It's all LGPL'd code.

-- 
Justin Couch                                   Author, Java Hacker
Snr Software Engineer                     [email-masked]
ADI Ltd, Systems Group              http://www.vlc.com.au/~justin/
Java3D FAQ:       http://tintoy.ncsa.uiuc.edu/~srp/java3d/faq.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Look through the lens, and the light breaks down into many lights.
 Turn it or move it, and a new set of arrangements appears... is it
 a single light or many lights, lights that one must know how to
 distinguish, recognise and appreciate? Is it one light with many
 frames or one frame for many lights?"      -Subcomandante Marcos
-------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Michael Mealling <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 12:03:16 -0500 (EST)

> hostname lookup system prevalent on unix boxen (/etc/hosts vs BIND vs

Cool! I was wondering how you were multiplexing the file and DNS stuff.

> currently available code. Stay tuned for the announcement hopefully

Can you format them as internet-drafts and submit them?

> best alternative.... It's all LGPL'd code.

Hmm... I bet the ietf would have a slight problem with that if it ever
went into real production. Its probably fine for beta testing but I
think it should be moved out of that space until the IETF has a policy
out on such things.

-MM

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling	|      Vote Libertarian!       | www.rwhois.net/michael
Sr. Research Engineer   |   www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett     | ICQ#:         14198821
Network Solutions	|          www.lp.org          |  [email-masked]

---

From: Justin Couch <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 06:57:19 +0800

> Cool! I was wondering how you were multiplexing the file and DNS stuff.

Been happening for a while. Works quite nicely. Also underdevelopment is
a JINI version (not anywhere near releasable yet!) BTW - hope you got my
patches for the DNS resolver that used the GNU regexp stuff instead of
the oronic classes.
 
> > http://www.vlc.com.au/~justin/java/urn/file_based_resolver.html
[snip] 
> Can you format them as internet-drafts and submit them?

Will do. 

> think it should be moved out of that space until the IETF has a policy

I suspect they would, I'm just out of namespacing options at the moment
:( Maybe I should talk to Sun and get javax.uri or javax.net.uri ????

So, this raises the question - who should I hassle in the IETF
collective about some sort of resolution on this?