IESG / Patrik,
First of all - I think it's interesting to carry URIs in DNS. However, I have a
few concerns about the document that I'd like to work through.
## The ENUM service registry
The document effectively gives a "type" for the URI by associating a value from
the ENUM service registry. While that makes sense from the standpoint of ENUM,
if this mechanism is truly generic to *all* URIs, it seems to me that it'd be
much more sensible to use the typing system already in place for URIs -- link
relations <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988>.
As it is, I think this proposal is going to surprise a lot of people very
unpleasantly, when they find that URIs have effectively become subservient to
ENUM, at least within the confines of DNS.
This could be addressed by either using link relations (although I realise that
would require a fair amount of work), or by renaming the RR to "ENUM_URI" or
similar, along with appropriate changes in the text (i.e., this is a record
specific to ENUM, not generic to all URIs in DNS).
## The "home page" example
Section 6 uses a "home page" lookup as the only example application for this
RR. To my knowledge, no Web browser does this or is considering doing so, and
moreover, pretty much any Web stack person would be extremely surprised by both
this.
Do you have any implementations of this use case, or prospect for them? Have
you talked to Web security folks about the implications of doing so?
## Alternative approaches
In Appendix A (D), the original allocation request says:
"""
There is no easy way to get from a domain name to a URI (or IRI).
"""
That's not actually true any more; we now have Well-Known URIs
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5785>, which allows an application to define
how to get a URI from a bare hostname. While it's true that it's currently a
little more expensive than DNS (requiring a TCP connection for the time being),
we do have substantial deployment experience with it, and it seems to be
operationally much simpler, as compared to adding a new DNS record.
Are there use cases where .well-known isn't workable, as compared to this RR?
Cheers,
On 28 Jan 2015, at 9:38 am, The IESG <iesg-secretary(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'The Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) DNS Resource Record'
<draft-faltstrom-uri-10.txt> as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2015-02-24. Exceptionally, comments
may be
sent to iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
This document defines a new DNS resource record, called the Uniform
Resource Identifier (URI) RR, for publishing mappings from hostnames
to URIs.
This document updates RFC 3404 and RFC 3958.
The file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-faltstrom-uri/
IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-faltstrom-uri/ballot/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
--
Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/