On 7/10/18 11:34 AM, Joe Abley wrote:
On Jul 10, 2018, at 17:22, Adam Roach <[email protected]> wrote:
Basically, you're describing a solution space that could be realized as
something like:
<img src="https://example.com/img/f.jpg"; ip="192.0.2.1">
Ok, interesting. I would suggest considering a richer scheme that
accommodates address families and multiple addresses with priorities,
but I see how that kind of thing would allow a client to do so
certificate matching and resource retrieval without using the DNS.
But this is really equivalent in just about every important way to sending the normal <img
src="https://example.com/img/f.jpg";> along with a pushed DNS record that indicates that
"example.com" resolves to "192.0.2.1" -- and this latter thing is (to my understanding, at
least) in scope of the conversation that Patrick is proposing to have.
My question is why you would involve the DNS at all if all the
performance-based resolution decisions can be made without it. You're
just adding cost and complexity without benefit.
In large part because DNS provides "a richer scheme that accommodates
address families and multiple addresses with priorities".
/a
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
![https://example.com/img/f.jpg"](https://example.com/img/f.jpg"){kind=link}