[IETF-IDRM] [IDRM] Re: draft-irtf-idrm-handle-system-protocol-00.txt

[Sam X. Sun (@S2000)]

Hi Mark,

Alhough the question is a bit outdated, I think it helps to cover the loose
end... and here is the answer to your earlier question:

>
> My first comment is that there does not seem to be name-resolution draft
in
> the mix.  Is this not to be published?  I can see a lot of uses for a
> namespace that is not global, such as between a content provider
> (publisher) and service provider (distributor) that want to use the
> metadata facilities of handles to store rights information with the
content
> work and to identify one or more "official repositories" for the content
> work.  If you're requiring a global namespace but not publishing the
> resolution mechanisms, then this seems to be an impediment to many
> business-to-business uses.
>

The mechanism for handle resolution is specified in the handle system
protocol draft, which defines the interface between handle system client and
server software. How handle server operates on its handle records (either
from its local database or some remote data center) is left open for
individual implementation. The idea is to allow people to add handle
protocol to any existing data services (e.g. Oracle database, web server,
file system, etc), instead of mandating one way or another.

For example, our prototype implementation of handle server uses a local
database to store and manage handle records. But people from www.enpia.com
and www.cidf.org are building handle servers using remotely located Oracle
and Informix databases for their handles. The resolution process within the
server is totally transparent to the client. This approach leaves the door
open so that people can do all they want to make the server more efficient
and don't have to re-enter all their data for such application.


Thanks,
Sam