Feature Requests item #1486923, was opened at 2006-05-11 18:37
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by lschiere
You can respond by visiting: 

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: jabber
Group: None
>Status: Closed
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Jason B. Sjobeck (sjobeck)
Assigned to: Nathan Walp (faceprint)
Summary: fall-back to TXT records when SRV records not present

Initial Comment:
Does any one have $0.02 to input for the rest of us
about the falling-back to TXT records in DNS when SRV
records are not present. Where I happened upon this is
in the set-up of a client's in-house jabber server, and
configuring GAIM for users on the LAN, versus
configuring GAIM for user on the WAN. Users on the LAN
hit the internal name server, find the SRV records &
are correctly re-directed to the jabber server. Those
on the WAN, hit the name server (which doesnt support
SRV records at this moment (but hopefully soon)) and do
not fall-back to the TXT records, and therefor are not
redirected to the jabber server, and fail to log-in.
The reason I ask about this, or for this, if others
agree, is that what I just described is how SPF works,
seemingly with great success. Now I wont try to speak
out of school about the RFC surrounding the enormous
topic of DNS, but I will say that the real world (I
hate that phrase sometimes) is full of sysadmin's who
do not understand what they are doing, especiually with
DNS (which is deceptively complex) and will be very
slow to implement their own abber servers if they can
not let their users loose in the big scary world with
the confidence that theyre connected just fine. I take
the time to mention all this for two reasons, I want to
see GAIM get huge & I want jabber to kill-off all the
other inferior protocols.

Any and all input apprecaited.




Comment By: Luke Schierer (lschiere)
Date: 2007-04-12 12:17

Logged In: YES 
Originator: NO

As we are closing this tracker, please submit any feature request that is
still valid to http://developer.pidgin.im.  Thanks. 


Comment By: Jason B. Sjobeck (sjobeck)
Date: 2006-05-16 19:50

Logged In: YES 

I just posted an email conversation between 'stpeter' (ie:
jabber RFC author) & myself relevant to this thread.

It would seem that a fall-back mechanism is called for here.


Thank you.



Comment By: Jason B. Sjobeck (sjobeck)
Date: 2006-05-16 19:48

Logged In: YES 

From: Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, 2006 May 16 16:16
To: jason atgoeshere sjobeck dotgoeshere COM
Subject: Re: question about 14.3 in rfc 3920
Signed By: stpeter atgoeshere jabber dotgoeshere org

Hash: SHA1

I've updated JEP-0156:

www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0156.html to version 0.3 which is
relevant to discussion about jabber client DNS queries.

> that TXT records will be added back? or might be added
back? or will
> they be replaced by CNAME's?

Not replaced. CNAMEs may be another fallback. Order yet to
be determined
as to TXT and CNAME (probably TXT before CNAME, not sure yet).

> I do not want to waste your time with my ignorance of the
protocol, but
> I do not understand the URL's that it refers to inside
those DNS
> records. I just happen to run Jivesoftware's Wildfire
server in-house,
> so that's the one I know, and it does have anything
running on ports
> 8080 or 8081.

The TXT records are for things like the HTTP connector, WAP
etc. Not the normal TCP sockets.

> The reason I ask is that I am working on this exact topic
with one of
> the developers of GAIM, & he needs to know what items
inside DNS to
> query inside the GAIM client to find the server. Right
now, GAIM queries
> for "SRV", finds none, and stops. 

That's wrong. It should try A record resolution after SRV.
And if it
does JEP-0156 it would then try TXT records. And maybe CNAME
if we
decide to do that. Exact order yet to be determined, but SRV
always be first.

> Not that you care, but, just in case
> you did, here is a debug. When I point the same GAIM
client a server
> with published SRV reocrds, it finds them, hits that other
FQDN on that
> port & we're done. So, like I say, we GAIM folks might
really benefit
> from your best guess as to what you think is the best way
to query DNS.
> For example, do we do SRV, then TXT, then CNAME, then A
record? That's
> four fall-backs, and might be nutty, I dont know, but then
again it
> might just future-proof us. That is, if it doesnt break
something else.

The order is still under discussion. We should have clarity
relatively soon.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org



Comment By: Richard Laager (rlaager)
Date: 2006-05-16 15:50

Logged In: YES 

I don't believe SPF uses SRV records at all, only TXT
records. Does the Jabber/XMPP spec say to fall back to TXT
records? If so, we may want to support it. If not, then
we're definitely not going to.


You can respond by visiting: 

Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
Gaim-features mailing list

Reply via email to