On 6/24/10 1:47 PM, Patrik Fältström wrote:
On 24 jun 2010, at 20.26, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
I can certainly see where it would be useful. However, I question
your comments in Section 9 of your draft: specifically that URI
should be viewed as a replacement for SRV. URI (may) make sense for
"resource" discovery, but I don't believe that is true for
"service" discovery - I think SRV still makes the best sense for
that
[not in context of the caldav draft...]
Hmm...you might be correct here. For example in the case of a URI RR
that refer to a mailto URI that in turn (theoretically) should use
SRV to know what port and hostname to use for the destination of the
SMTP connection?
So a URI might in some cases in turn result in the need for an SRV
lookup?
That's often the case for xmpp URIs.
Peter
--
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf