Keith Moore - le (m/j/a) 3/15/09 11:49 AM:
Rémi Després wrote:
Keith Moore - le (m/j/a) 3/14/09 4:28 PM:
Is it not true that those that use URLs and "connect by name" don't need
to know whether a remote-endpoint address + port is obtained from an A,
an AAAA, or an SRV record?
each application is defined to work in a
certain way, and most are not defined to use SRV records.
My understanding so far is that if an application uses gethostbyname(),
and if its resolver, seeing that the URL is for a SRV RR (e.g.
_HTTP._TCP.MyWebServer/HomePage), asks for an SRV RR, then the
application, having submitted the URL transparently, doesn't know
whether the address and port it gets have been obtained directly in an A
or AAAAA, or after an intermediate SRV.
If this is wrong (it may be), can you please explain the reason?
if an implementation of gethostbyname() works that way, it's broken, and
it's breaking its applications.
Oops.
I wanted to say connect-by-name (as before) rather than gethostbyname.
(And I may have to learn more about socket APIs before pursuing the
subject.)
Apologies for this.
furthermore
the SRV RFC explicitly forbids using SRV records for apps that aren't
defined to use them.
I didn't see it in RFC 2052.
Could you indicate where in this RFC, or in which other RFC, this is?
RFC 2782:
Applicability Statement
In general, it is expected that SRV records will be used by clients
for applications where the relevant protocol specification indicates
that clients should use the SRV record. Such specification MUST
define the symbolic name to be used in the Service field of the SRV
record as described below. It also MUST include security
considerations. Service SRV records SHOULD NOT be used in the absence
of such specification.
I will think about reasons why this restriction is "expected".
Thanks for the reference.
RD
|
_______________________________________________
nat66 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
