On 6/24/10 1:47 PM, Patrik Fältström wrote: > > On 24 jun 2010, at 20.26, Cyrus Daboo wrote: > >> I can certainly see where it would be useful. However, I question >> your comments in Section 9 of your draft: specifically that URI >> should be viewed as a replacement for SRV. URI (may) make sense for >> "resource" discovery, but I don't believe that is true for >> "service" discovery - I think SRV still makes the best sense for >> that > > > [not in context of the caldav draft...] > > Hmm...you might be correct here. For example in the case of a URI RR > that refer to a mailto URI that in turn (theoretically) should use > SRV to know what port and hostname to use for the destination of the > SMTP connection? > > So a URI might in some cases in turn result in the need for an SRV > lookup?
That's often the case for xmpp URIs. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
