--On Wednesday, December 16, 2015 15:42 +0100 Patrik Fältström <paf@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 16 Dec 2015, at 15:22, Masataka Ohta wrote: > >> But, it is stupid to forbid "https://example.com"; and force >> using "https://www.example.com";, which means, in a long run, >> a domain will support a lot of application protocols. > > This is why the URI would be: > > _http._tcp.example.com. IN URI 1 1 > "https://www.example.com/"; _http._tcp.www.example.com. IN URI > 1 1 "https://www.example.com/"; Especially because there are a good number of very sound reasons, especially when one looks a very large domains with many hosts and their own deep hierarchy and at assorted IDN label cases, why one would not want example.com to be a synonym for www.example.com. In other worse, it is not as obviously "stupid" as Masataka's comment suggests. john