I disagree w.r.t. your comments regarding the use of SRV RRs for NFSv4
domain root location.
I think it would be a mistake to use TXT RRs to encode what SRV RR
RDATA does just fine just to get around whatever we think the rules
are or ought to be for using SRV RRs.
However, I'll note that the service here is NOT "NFSv4" but "NFSv4
domain root", thus, if it would make everybody happy I propose
changing this:
_nfs4._domainroot._tcp IN SRV 0 0 2049 nfs1tr.example.net.
_nfs4._domainroot._tcp IN SRV 1 0 2049 nfs2ex.example.net.
to this:
_nfs4domainroot._tcp IN SRV 0 0 2049 nfs1tr.example.net.
_nfs4domainroot._tcp IN SRV 1 0 2049 nfs2ex.example.net.
But IMO this is silly. For example, Microsoft's Active Directory and
its Windows (and other) clients use SRV RRs like this:
_ldap._tcp.gc._msdcs.<domain>
_ldap._tcp.<site>._sites.<domain>
...
If it's time to go update RFC2782, well, let's, but let's not hold up
the rest of the world over it.
Nico
--
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf