On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 01:42:26PM +0200, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
2011/7/23 Roy T. Fielding <fielding(_at_)gbiv(_dot_)com>:
Right. If WS borns with no SRV (as a MUST for WS clients) then just
forget it and let inherit all the ugly limitations from HTTP protocol.
I am tired of this. SRV is not used for HTTP because SRV adds latency
to the initial request for no useful purpose whatsoever.
And I'm really tired of hearing the argument of the "latency" which
nobody demostrates (but just talks about it without replying me how
the same is not a problem in realtime protocols like SIP and XMPP).
Because you have never worked in a mobile phone environment. You'd be
amazed to see what end users are paying for ! Count 300-500 ms on average
for a DNS request.
In contrast, HTTP is deployed in an anarchic
manner in which there are often several HTTP servers per machine
(e.g., tests, staging, production, CUPS, etc,).
Could you explain me why DNS A is good but DNS SRV is bad in such
"anarchic" deployments?
DNS is not mandatory for HTTP. It's not "DNS A" which makes it good, but
"no mandatory DNS". This is a huge difference.
Regards,
Willy
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf