> From: Joe Touch <touch@xxxxxxx>
>> Noel Chiappa wrote:
>>> From: Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Regarding SRV, it's not acceptable to expect that as a condition of
>>> deploying a new application, every user who wishes to run that
>>> application be able to write to a DNS zone. Most users do not have
>>> DNS zones that they can write to.
>> Yes. Architecturally speaking, it's somewhat dubious that information
>> which really only needs to be localized to the host
>> (application<->port binding) has to be sent to the DNS.
>> It would be easy to run a tiny little U[D]P "binding" server that
>> took in an application name (yes, we'd have to register those, but
>> string-space is infinite), and returned the port.
> Only if it asked a well-known server ON THAT MACHINE.
Yes, but why is that a problem? Again, in architectural terms, you are
limiting the scope over which the information (about which appplication is
on which port) has to be spread, to the machine it applies to - always good
when you get that kind of congruence.
Why would you want machine X to know the mapping for machine Y? If you're
going to be talking to machine Y anyway (to talk to the application), why
can't Y also be the one you ask for the mapping? And then you don't have to
set up all the mechanism for machine X to learn what machine Y's mappings
are.
> But we cannot assume a hosts' DNS is available for that purpose. For
> most of us, the DNS entry isn't under our control, nor is it likely to
> be for the forseeable future.
Keith and I concurred on that.
Noel
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf