> On Jan 21, 2016, at 6:33 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The only objection I have to using /.well-known/srv/ as the prefix is > that will turn the 24 existing registrations into special cases which > will inevitably end up as corner cases that future specifications have > to work around. Just as there is no need for protocols that have registered a service name to use the SRV lookup that is implied, there is no need for protocols that use SRV to use the /.well-known/srv URL that is implied. There may be good reasons to use a different /.well-known URL, such as in RFC 7711-7712 (POSH). For POSH, we wanted a security slice through several protocols that might use /.well-known for other protocol-specific reasons, and didn't want to have to mix the security information into several different document formats. Given this, there will continue to be other registrations in /.well-known not in /.well-known/srv, and we shouldn't let the messiness stop us from making progress. -- Joe Hildebrand