On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Joe Touch <touch@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On 9/12/2011 1:00 PM, Nico Williams wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Joe Touch<touch@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On 9/12/2011 12:00 PM, Robert Thurlow wrote: >> No.... We don't want to enumerate *all* NFSv4 servers in a domain. We >> want to enumerate all NFSv4 domain-root servers in a domain. Slight >> difference. > > I know what you *want* to do. But short of assigning another port number for > that capability and getting another service name, this simply isn't a > service in the IANA service/port numbers sense, so I'm not surprised it > doesn't uniquely map to SRV records. I don't think that's the correct way to go about this. I see nothing wrong with what's proposed. I say we let the LC run and see where we stand on consensus at the end. If we end up on the rough side of consensus, so be it -- in that case then I think we'd want to undertake an update of RFC2782, rather than bend to it. We want to do what's right. Nico -- _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf