[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[SAGE] System Naming Conventions
- To: sage-members@usenix.org
- Subject: [SAGE] System Naming Conventions
- From: Neil Waybright <neil.waybright@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 22:24:16 -0800
- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=M3yijqtvAngTSIALKSoCS8mux6QMV38gUnOlaI8CsDSqIqLYU2id/pJmDjHpBPKBvIzmfGQQPlcuA6RACjxvS+lkcmN6hFk/8qD8dMucAx3kJ7GMaOrdirP1j2m38IwXdpeQ+7r1rkiD5PTghKvlUJHZkbEOKaL5qWAI3AZ+ka8=
- Reply-To: Neil Waybright <neil.waybright@gmail.com>
- Sender: owner-sage-members@usenix.org
I am looking for formal studies of system naming conventions. I read
with a great deal of interest the thread on the subject on 31 March
2004 (<http://www.sage.org/mailarchive/sage-members-archive/2004/msg00803.html>
was part of the series). There were a number of good points, but I am
searching for a more analytical treatment. An article from a peer
reviewed journal would be best. I asked the smartest person on the
Internet (Mr. Google), but my google-fu must be weak. I found the
links below [1], [2], [3], [4], but they aren't quite as thorough as I
would like. Does anyone know of a better source? You can reply to me
off-list and I will summarize if people feel this horse is been beaten
too many times (after all, [4] is the same conversation in 1998)....
Neil
[1] <http://www.bris.ac.uk/is/services/networks/dns/naming.html>
[2] <http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1178.html>
[3] <http://itmanager.blogs.com/notes/2004/03/system_naming_c.html>
[4] <http://www.sage.org/mailarchive/sage-members-archive/1998/msg00369.html?
--
On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament!], `Pray,
Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right
answers come out?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of
confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.
-- Charles Babbage