On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 10:06:21AM -0800, Dave Crocker wrote:
Hadmut,
HD> We could use a much more modern and robust protocol, the
HD> famous and ubiquous HTTP.
Let's see if I understand your proposal:
You want to stop using a distributed lookup service that has worked well
for 15 years, and you want to replace it with a point-to-point document
retrieval service?
No. You don't understand my proposal.
Oh, no. That's wrong. You want to continue using DNS 'for what it was
built' which is mapping between names and addresses. You just don't want
to use it for this particular, new name/address mapping.
No. Again, you don't understand my proposal.
I just don't want to use DNS to this particular, new
name -> lmap record mapping, where the record is some
arbitrary octet sequence of maybe several kilobytes.
DNS has never been built oder designed for that purpose.
So how could it be wrong to not use DNS for something it
has not been made for?
And, furthermore, analysis of all the comments I received for
my RMX drafts and recent discussions showed that some domains
would need to dynamically generate the records depending on the
query (see the hotmail example in
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-danisch-scaf-00.txt
DNS is currently completely unable to provide dynamically generated
replies. HTTP servers can easily do that (CGI).
Again: I don't want to replace DNS in any way. I just don't want to
invent a new use for DNS which DNS can't do properly. That's all.
regards
Hadmut