Lists Home |
Date Index |
From: "Miles Sabin" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote,
> > All the "always resolves" means is that if the http: endowed URI is
> > handed to a resolver, it will resolve. What gets returned may be
> > caca, but it will resolve.
> What? Even http://this.host.does.not.exist/ ?
> You won't even get a 404 from that. Do you count TCP-level failures as
Isn't this a bit outside of the bounds we are really talking about here? It
seems highly unlikely that someone is going to use a URL like that in any of
their work because they are not the recognized authority of that URL. There
is always the risk that someone else will get the authority (the future
owner of "*.not.exist") or that someone else will conincidentally use the
same URL (non-authoritatively) for their own purposes.
Though I know it is not absolutely required, most organizations tend to
create URLs, URNs, etc. that they have "authority" to create and control.
In the case of URLs, this usually invloves embedding a domain name that the
Another way of looking at this is if I were to hand out the following URL
(created by me):
Must this resolve? Of course not! I had no authority to create it (no more
than your "http://this.host.does.not.exist/" above). But if I were to
Then, since I am the authority for "seairth.com", I have created an
authoritative URI/URL. And it should resolve.
I guess the thing here is that we can always argue that a URI/URL created by
someone who does not have the authority to do so will not necessarily
resolve. But what about when they do have the authority? Am I responsible
for any URLs that start with "http://www.seairth.com/"? I say absolutely
yes. And they should be resolvable. Absolutely.