[NCAP-Discuss] Today's discussion on name collision definition

[Jay Daley]

Today we discussed the definition of name colliision and agreed an updated version:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1h1iuouwwmzitjyFlEPgJHLabgxhdTQTo7Ehfd1v1CBo/edit

The key changes to note are:

1.  Settled on the simple word 'used' rather than anything regarding a definition of a name, and whether or not it is syntactically valid.

2.  Defined one namespace as the 'RZM namespace' and therefore a collision as a leakage between the RZM namespace and any non-RZM namespace.

3.  Made it clear that we are talking about new domains being introduced and the effect of that.

4.  Added some definitions for the three sections - A. in scope and subject to analysis; B. in scope but not subject to analysis; C. Out of scope.

5.  Slightly amended B to allow for the possibility that someone may find a compelling case why we do study B, but because of 3 above that would only be for new domains being introduced.

6.  Added under A a new situation, where a user *unintentionally* uses a name that leads to a collision later, probably as the result of broken software. 

Steve will issue a formal call to the list, but please speak up now if you have any concerns with this

Jay


-- 
Jay Daley
jay at daley.org.nz
+64 21 678840
skype: jaydaley
twitter: @jay_daley