- From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 18:25:38 -0400
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: marka@isc.org, doh@ietf.org, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, driu@ietf.org, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, jabley@hopcount.ca
- Message-ID: <CABtrr-Wv_KHWOzTB-+xthMew6HfKpaqA09dgadX1EX97F2aK_A@mail.gmail.com>
I'm in, but will need to catch up on the convo... I'll do so. BTW, don't look at the Yelp/Foursquare reviews for the social venue... yikes On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 9:32 PM Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > I didn't find those, but I found many others. > > I'll start collecting. How about Tuesday, say 6:45-7:45pm? > > > > > On 11 Jul 2018, at 11:30 am, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote: > > > > > > > >> On 11 Jul 2018, at 11:22 am, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> On 11 Jul 2018, at 3:55 am, Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Jul 10, 2018, at 18:02, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> In large part because DNS provides "a richer scheme that accommodates > address families and multiple addresses with priorities". > >>> > >>> *cups hand to ear* > >>> > >>> Was that the sound of a distant desire to specify use of SRV for HTTP? > >>> > >> > >> I recently did some digging on this topic, and can try to characterise > what the issues / objections are. > > > > I think there are three main objections. > > > > 1) Wildcards don’t work with prefixes. > > 2) Additional data isn’t always returned it may require multiple round > trips. > > 3) Additional data processing doesn’t support negative responses. > > > > All of these issues are trivially easy to fix. It just require > willingness to implement. > > > > 1) is addressed by defining a new type(s) rather than using prefixes. > > 2) is addressed by getting recursive servers to fill in missing > additional data before returning. Named has code in review for this for > SRV as proof of concept. > > 3) is addressed by adding some signalling between the client and > recursive server to indicate if the additional section is complete or not. > > > > > >> Would people be interested in a (hopefully brief) side meeting to > discuss and maybe come to a shared understanding of the problem space? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> -- > >> Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> DNSOP mailing list > >> DNSOP@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > > > > -- > > Mark Andrews, ISC > > 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia > > PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > _______________________________________________ > Doh mailing list > Doh@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/doh > -- Joseph Lorenzo Hall Chief Technologist, Center for Democracy & Technology [https://www.cdt.org] 1401 K ST NW STE 200, Washington DC 20005-3497 e: joe@cdt.org, p: 202.407.8825, pgp: https://josephhall.org/gpg-key Fingerprint: 3CA2 8D7B 9F6D DBD3 4B10 1607 5F86 6987 40A9 A871
Received on Wednesday, 11 July 2018 22:26:33 UTC