Personal Namespaces Mark Allman (ICSI)

Summary: Mark talked about how the names are a mess; in particular how it
provides no information what they map to and how the name may change
over time but the resource remains the same, and so on.  Search engine
solves some of the problems, but is there a better way.

PNS is an over-arching name space; it adds a naming layer.  It lets
the users name their names, or provide pointers to their objects, in
the context sensitive name space.  

The user's namespace is NID, and have names within this space.  We can
also have pointers to other people's name-space in this.

Sharing can be through a DHT, since NID are flat names. The scheme
works on per-name bases not namespace basis, but we could put a index
on top of it.

There is a boot straping problem in that the NIDs are more obscure,
and harder to share.  For now just share them the way they are shared
now; we could also have have a NID0 and all the NIDs organized under
it.  

We expect that use of DHT will keep it robust and caching will
improve performance.

Security: names can be validated, can be encrypted, and there is no
root DHT node that can be compromised.

Q: What are the main differences are between keynames and unmanaged naming
architecture.

A: There is some amount of overlap.  Ours is more over-arching, that it can be
used for more things.  Also UNA is gossip based but here we using a DHT.

Q: There are two parts of the problem; first to assign unique names,
and second is to maintain locations corresponding to names.  It would
be helpful to think about these independently.

A: The way I look at this is that it does not replace any naming scheme.  I am
only providing aliasing.

Q/Comment: UNA is doing conceptually the same thing;  the right thing would be
to understand that conceptual relationship exists and it is useful.

Q: There is a symbolic hardlink concept here, that is not clear.

A:  If someone discovers someone through you, when they want to link
to them, they should link directly to them.

Q: Why is it not your social networking website that maintains
it.

A: One way it is different is that it is independent from a individual provider,
and if they start charging, then you will not be stuck on it.

Q: Opensocial is an open standard, could you use that?  

A: Lets take this offline.