- From: Michael Mealling <michaelm@rwhois.net>
- Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 11:05:45 -0500
- To: Dirk.vanGulik@jrc.it
- Cc: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>, howes@netscape.com, ietf-asid@umich.edu, uri@bunyip.com
Dirk.vanGulik@jrc.it wrote: > > There is a solution but it requires the use of the SRV record which is > > not in widespread use yet.... > > > > Actually one of the things we are using here internally are URL's of the > shape: > > srvq://some.f.q.d.n/opaque-string > > To signal that the URL lookup/obtaining is to use an SRV query to work > out what protocol exist to obtain the resource. But to codify this > indirection, whilst keeping in line with the URL spec was beyond my > grasp of the subject as that spec seems very intent on one-step location; > issues like chaching and normalizing/specific instantces in different > protocols get really hairy. > > To be quite honest; the above really is a poor mans URN. So the UDP > version of protocols might want to wait for URNs to be there :-) > (Shameless plug this is :-) Part of the problem with waiting on URNs is that a) I'm writing some of the stuff that people are waiting on (;-) and b) I want to be able to use application/directory as a standard way of passing around some N2Ls information as well as a very limited, directory services oriented URC. Thus I need to put URLs in there that can have TCP or UDP connection styles. Does anyone have a solution for this? Or should I leave it up to each URL scheme to deal with UDP its own way? -MM -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Michael Mealling | 505 Huntmar Park Drive | Phone: (703)742-0400 Software Engineer | Herndon, VA 22070 | Fax: (703)742-9552 Network Solutions | <URL:http://www.netsol.com> | michaelm@rwhois.net
Received on Thursday, 19 December 1996 11:08:46 UTC