Re: TSV-DIR review of draft-daboo-srv-caldav-05

On 17 jul 2010, at 21.39, Joe Touch wrote:

> Are you suggesting a new RR instead of the SRV or in addition to the SRV?
>
> The latter seems useful; the former begs the question of how many SRV 
> variants we would want.
A new RR that is a replacement for the SRV for the cases where one need a URI 
and not only hostname+port.

Otherwise, same syntax and usage as SRV (i.e. prefix of the owner decide the 
protocol and service etc).

It is therefore more a replacement for SRV than replacement for NAPTR (that 
give back a list of services given a domain name).

See draft-faltstrom-uri

   Patrik


> Joe
>
> On 7/17/2010 12:33 PM, Patrik Fältström wrote:
> > On 17 jul 2010, at 21.27, Joe Touch wrote:
> >
> > > The appropriate solution for a port discovered via SRV records is to use 
> > > TXT records.
> > And, for the ones that have not followed the whole history of this last 
> > call, my view is that a new RR type is needed, and I propose a URI resource 
> > record that as RDATA have the full URI to the resource in question.
> >
> >    Patrik

PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf