Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
What Masataka san is saying here makes perfect sense to me. I proposed
exactly this approach a decade ago.
Thanks. It should be obvious from the beginning (IIRC, yes, a decade
ago or so) that, if the problem is service location, the simplest and,
^^^^^^^^
thus, the best solution should only involve URLs for which SRV is
a little more than enough and no further mechanism is necessary.
Those who insist to involve more general mechanisms involving
generic URIs should, first, generalize their problem to be
service identification.
Though mere identification without location may not be so useful,
that is not my problem.
> Take FTP for example, it doesn't use SRV today, probably never will.
I hope they will if all the other schemes depending on the authority
section start using SRV. Though a complication of FTP as a standard
protocol is that it has two default ports, one for control another
for data, it should be negligible as most, if not all, implementations
ignore the default port for data.
Masataka Ohta
