On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Patrik Fältström <paf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
My feedback to Andrew when he presented this to me was that:
- In general I am nervous of moving HTTP header attributes into the DNS, as it might create inconsistencies when for example the data in DNS do not match what is in the HTTP header, and we already have a content-negotiation mechanism in HTTP
I think that is simply solved by stating none of it overrides the content negotiation of the application. But a mismatch here is an adminstrative error, in my opinion.
- Given experience with length of URI / text fields in DNS, I would have had the encoding of RDATA as "flag" "flag" "flag" "uri" (while being nervous over the size restrictions of the URI...which is the reason in URI the uri is all of RDATA except the weight and priority).
- I am also nervous over the size of the RRSet, i.e. same issue I see with NAPTR, and the reason why I added the prefix (like SRV) to the URI RR
I plan to move to use this advice. Thanks.
-andy