- From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
- Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 17:36:59 +0100
- To: Gervase Markham <gerv@mozilla.org>
- Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org, dnsop@ietf.org
Gervase Markham wrote: > > Wouldn't it be more appropriate for MyBank to _itself_ say the history > > for these sites should be grouped? E.g. in an HTTP response header, > > or DNS record for mybank.co.uk? > > The total amount of effort required for this solution is mind-boggling. How is it more work for them to publish over DNS or HTTP, than to send you the information to publish, with the associated time lag etc? You've asked for the same thing: for administrators of certain domains to provide you with information about independent or related users of those subdomains. The only difference that I see, is you're able to include commonly known information about TLDs like *.com and *.co.uk. I agree with that: it's good to collect and publish the info. For the more obscure ISP-owned domains with independent user sub-domains, I don't see a difference in work _for them_ between you putting out a call and collecting the info, and keeping it update as new ISPs come on line, and the ISPs having a mechanism to publish it themselves. Except that the latter will be more accurate, and less work for you. -- Jamie > > Also, wouldn't DNS generally be the appropriate mechanism to say what > > grouping relationships there are under $DOMAIN? After all, the > > administrative control for the grouping info which you are maintaining > > for *.$DOMAIN, and DNS for *.$DOMAIN, are the same. > > It would be an appropriate mechanism; when it does contain this > information, let me know.
Received on Monday, 9 June 2008 16:37:35 UTC