On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 08:07:25AM +0100, Patrik Fältström 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
If anything, it may not provide the optimization that's desired. (Any
numbers?)
- 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).
+1
- 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
In for a penny, in for a pound.
Nico
--