Re: unique IDs (Re: TS (Re: RFC: OP cheating))

[Samuel Tardieu <sam@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>>>> "Christophe" == Christophe Kalt <kalt@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Christophe> Undernet did it the easy way by assigning an ID to each
Christophe> server.  It looks nice for routing (even tho I doubt
Christophe> there's that much to win), but makes it annoying to link a
Christophe> new server as you need a unique ID assigned.

Well, in our case it is easy: use a two-bytes ID <TLD><nnn>, where <TLD>[1]
is a byte assigned to each top-level domain and <nnn> is a number
allocated by the <TLD> representatives inside their own domain.

This way, C:N lines would contain both the server name and the ID of
the peer, so no mistake is possible, and you have solved runtime
unique ID allocation by replacing it by static ID allocation.

If one TLD needs more than 256 entries, then you can give them another 
one since we will not have 256 TLD in the near future, and it will
always be possible to extend it to a 4-bytes ID if needed[2]. 

  Sam

Footnotes: 
[1]  Top-level domain or IRC administrative domain, whatever is the
     most logical.

[2]  Well, after writing this, I think that
     <TLD><Region-or-ISP><Institute><Server> may even be more appropriate,
     using a 4-bytes ID.
-- 
Samuel Tardieu -- sam@xxxxxxxxxxx