NAM 1.0 NO IDEA Avatar
  1. OMG Issue

NAM — INS: compliance with RFC2396

  • Key: NAM-8
  • Legacy Issue Number: 2669
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Given that the FTF is considering changes to the URL schemes proposed by
    the Interoperable Name Service proposal it may be worthwhile to raise the
    issue of compliance with RFC2396 again. RFC2396 defines Uniform Resource

    The INS RFC (orbos/97-12-20) required that submissions specify a
    relationship between CosNaming::Names and Uniform Resource Locators
    (URLs). I assume it was implied that proposals must comply with the
    current IETF specification for the Uniform Resource Locator (URL) generic

    RFC2396 uses the more general term Uniform Resource Identifier (URI). It
    makes a clear distinction between two orthogonal parts of a URI.

    The first part specifies how a remote resource can be located and
    retrieved. When describing the distinction between the two parts the RFC
    refers to this first part as the Uniform Resource Locator (URL) to stress
    the aspect of "locating" a remote resource.

    The second, optional component of a URI is the fragment identifier. This
    part of the URI contains information that is interpreted by the user agent
    AFTER the retrieval action has been successfully completed.

    The proposed iiopname (or corbaname) scheme also has two components, one
    part is used essentially as if it was a iioploc URL to LOCATE an object of
    type CosNaming::NamingContext. The second component is interpreted, by the
    ORB that uses the URL, AFTER the object was retrieved, to resolve a
    stringified CosNaming::Name relative to that context.

    Clearly, these two aspects of the bootstrapping mechanism: (1) locating
    the naming context, and (2) resolving the name, are better defined as
    orthogonal components.

    An ordinary URL, for example using the iioploc scheme, suffices for
    locating the naming context. A fragment identifier, separated from the
    URL by the "#" character, is the ideal place for the stringified name that
    is interpreted on the client-side.

  • Reported: NAM 1.0b1 — Fri, 28 May 1999 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — NAM 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    A separator for corbaname is appropriate. This simplified the description of corbaname, into essent

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT