-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10/14/09 2:07 AM, Winfried Tilanus wrote: > On 10/13/2009 Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > > Hi, > >> And why do we have to hardcode a port? You're right that XEP-0156 >> provides what we need. The TXT record could be: >> >> _xmppconnect IN TXT "_xmpp-client-xbosh=https://bosh.jabber.org:5280/bind"; >> >> That specifies the hostname, the port, and the path. No need for any of >> this discussion (other than perhaps registering 5280 with IANA). > > I try to figure out what the implications of this are, but it kind of > boils my mind. Please help me out. > > In the introduction of xep-0156 I read why SRV records won't work for BOSH: > > "2. Define a way to specify alternative connection methods as part of > the existing DNS SRV records (see RFC 2782 [7]) for a domain that offers > XMPP services. While this approach sounds promising, it is not feasible > since the DNS SRV Target field can be used only to specify domain names > and cannot be used to specify full URIs (such as the URL for an HTTP > connection manager)." > > But later on in the business rules it says: > > "1. TXT lookups MUST be used only as a fallback after the methods > specified in RFC 3920 have been exhausted."
The point of that rule is to prevent some sneaky person from defining a new XEP-0156 connection method like "_xmpp-client-tcp" to override the SRV records defined in the core XMPP specification. Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkrWfNcACgkQNL8k5A2w/vzvYgCfUXUL6xtI9GlEhs+RgJEfp5Qm GHgAoMb+ZewgLIT6tVvSuQ6siS1F51qM =4aHw -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
