On 21/09/2018 19:11, JW wrote:

> I also feel from this discussion, we are all roughly on the same page. 
> We want SRV as the long term solution ...

except that we heard at the side meeting in Montreal (albeit from
browser people rather than content people) that they *don't* want SRV,
because it has fields that are not compatible with the web security model.

I still want to define a new RR that does have mutually agreed semantics
that's specifically for use by HTTP(s), but so far no takers.


DNSOP mailing list

Reply via email to