W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2009

Re: http+srv worth its own URI scheme? (ISSUE-49 schemeProtocols-49)

From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:06:49 -0500
Cc: www-tag@w3.org, Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <7DECBBEE-7C16-4144-A7D7-58DAB3391BE8@w3.org>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Hmm. What is the overhead if every web browser does an SRV record  
Does it do it at the same time as the A record lookup?
Does it wait to get back no SRV record before trying an A record lookup?
Does this slow down HTTP operations at all?
(What is the effect on the economy of slowing down an HTTP lookup by  
each nanosecond?)

If one *were* to introduce the hassle of a new URI scheme then I would  
prefer to do something I had always wanted to do and remove the  
difference between the . and the /
as in:


where the algorithm would be to look for A record for www.ietf.org or  
an SRV for ietf.org,
or failing that the same up (www.org or SRV for org.) or down (record  
for www.internet-drafts.ietf.org or an SRV for internet- 
drafts.ietf.org) the tree.

I think http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jennings-http-srv-02.txt
makes the mistake of introducing a very general and potentially useful  
protocol but designing it for the case of new API applications only is  
I agree the overhead of a new URI scheme is too great.  The cost of  
https: as a separate scheme has I think been great too, although I  
suspect one can argue a need for https: in way you can't for http+srv.


On 2009-02 -23, at 13:32, Dan Connolly wrote:

> srv records for web servers seems like a fine idea,
> long overdue; but I'm skeptical that it's worth a new URI scheme.
> I'm interested to know whether Noah and other TAG members
> have other opinions.
> cf. ISSUE-49 schemeProtocols-49
> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/49
> Begin forwarded message:
>> From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
>> Date: 23 February 2009 07:22:43 CEST
>> To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
>> Subject: Fwd: I-D Action:draft-jennings-http-srv-01.txt
>> Archived-At:
> <http://www.w3.org/mid/327B22FA-F09A-4817-8C2B-E728D5E08274@mnot.net
>> FYI.
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
>>> Date: 23 February 2009 3:45:01 PM
>>> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
>>> Subject: I-D Action:draft-jennings-http-srv-01.txt
>>> Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org
>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>>> directories.
>>>     Title           : DNS SRV Records for HTTP
>>>     Author(s)       : C. Jennings
>>>     Filename        : draft-jennings-http-srv-01.txt
>>>     Pages           : 7
>>>     Date            : 2009-02-22
>>> This document specifies a new URI scheme called http+srv which  
>>> uses a
>>> DNS SRV lookup to locate a HTTP server.  The http+srv scheme  
>>> operates
>>> in the same way as an http scheme but instead of the normal DNS A
>>> record lookup that a http scheme would use, it uses an DNS SRV
>>> lookup.  This memo also defines a https+srv scheme that operates in
>>> the same was a an https URI but uses DNS SRV lookups.
>>> The draft is being discussed on the apps-discuss@ietf.org list.
>>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jennings-http-srv-01.txt
>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
>>> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
>>> Internet-Draft.
>> Content-Type: text/plain<BR>Content-ID:
> &lt;2009-02-22203840.I-D@ietf.org
>> &gt;<BR><BR>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> I-D-Announce mailing list
>>> I-D-Announce@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
>>> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
>>> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
> -- 
> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
> gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 24 February 2009 16:07:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:00 UTC