Hi, Robert,
On 9/12/2011 12:00 PM, Robert Thurlow wrote:
Joe Touch wrote:
Either this is an nfs service or it isn't.
If it is, then it should be using _nfs._tcp.example.com, etc. If it
isn't, then:
a) a new service name is required
which then *requires*
b) a new port number be assigned
This doesn't show any real understanding of what we're actually
trying to do. To recap:
We don't want to enumerate all NFS servers in a domain.
That's what SRV records do. If that's not what you want, you should
consider defining a new RR type.
That is
not an interesting enumeration. We want to find certain ones that
are known to share a "domain root" (hence the syntax we chose).
That can be accomplished as noted below.
When we find those servers, we will talk NFSv4 to them (not a new
service). And we will talk NFSv4 on port 2049 (not a new port).
Your proposal above makes things worse in that it will no longer
be clear what the SRV record means. It also ensures that we have a
problem if we ever want to enumerate other subsets of NFS servers
(none of which have been discussed).
You can enumerate any subset of NFS servers you by differentiatiung them
in the TXT records or Target fields.
I.e., when you ask for nfs in a domain, you should get back the SRVs for
all servers in that domain; further filtering should be done on the
information returned by the client.
To expect otherwise is to confuse the DNS with a true search engine.
Joe
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf