What I laid out is essentially a collection of options that seem to come up time and again dealing with unique identifiers.? I think there is benefit in standardizing it.
Considerations in designing unique identifiers sounds like it could be a worthwhile RFC. I just don?t think they?re UUID?s.
I concur. I think it would be a better proposal if they were called something else.
Cool - I will come up with some ideas for different names and send those around soon.
As as you point at in [1], it's trivial to covert between your "version 6" and the V1 UUID --- it's just a matter of swapping the bytes. http://gh.peabody.io/uuidv6/ /dev/urandom is a Linux specific thing. The better choice is libuuid.
To clarify - the information at http://gh.peabody.io/uuidv6/ is out of date, and the new proposal (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bctTr14CrxzjHUIRAkT8jB46Jomr9aB2JQ9hDCh3cJg ) includes things like variable amounts of random data and alternate text encodings - stuff that will almost certainly never end up in libuuid. The issue being that many applications need something like a UUID but can't use an actual UUID for one reason or another (e.g. sorting properties, insufficient unguessability, too long, etc.); thus the new proposal.
I think it's pretty clear all around though that calling this new thing a UUID is just confusing, so yeah I'll think of some other name ideas.
