How does draft-schwartz-httpbis-dns-alt-svc-02 with some changes to make it more DNS-aligned (e.g. the name as a separate field in the record) not help here? It comes from the HTTP world and is aligned with the existing AltSvc feature and thus is useful in other ways (such as perhaps solving the DNS deployabilty issues for encrypted SNI):
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-schwartz-httpbis-dns-alt-svc-02 - Erik On Sun, Sep 23, 2018, 10:41 AM Ray Bellis <r...@bellis.me.uk wrote: > 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. > > Ray > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
