On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Patrik Fältström <paf(_at_)netnod(_dot_)se>
wrote:
My feedback to Andrew when he presented this to me was that:
- In general I am nervous of moving HTTP header attributes into the DNS,
as it might create inconsistencies when for example the data in DNS do not
match what is in the HTTP header, and we already have a content-negotiation
mechanism in HTTP
I think that is simply solved by stating none of it overrides the content
negotiation of the application. But a mismatch here is an adminstrative
error, in my opinion.
- Given experience with length of URI / text fields in DNS, I would have
had the encoding of RDATA as "flag" "flag" "flag" "uri" (while being
nervous over the size restrictions of the URI...which is the reason in URI
the uri is all of RDATA except the weight and priority).
- I am also nervous over the size of the RRSet, i.e. same issue I see with
NAPTR, and the reason why I added the prefix (like SRV) to the URI RR
I plan to move to use this advice. Thanks.
-andy