Re: RFC 2782: SRV weight evaluation

[Stuart Cheshire <[e-mail]>]

>>If weights are to have a sensible intuitive meaning, then
>>(in the presence of records containing weights greater than 0)
>>records with weight 0 should *never* be selected.
>
>as a guess, i'd say that "records with a weight of zero in a record
>set with some non-zero weights will end up being selected last in no
>particular order".  that is to say, all non-zero weighted records will
>be picked first, and then the zero weight ones will be picked.

Yes, you are right. That was what I meant.

My unstated assumption was that after trying to contact a server and 
failing, that record is removed from the list and the process is 
repeated. After all the non-zero weight records have been tried and 
failed and removed, the zero-weight records are no longer "in the 
presence of records containing weights greater than 0", so they are now 
eligible for selection.

Perhaps this wording is better:

---

In the presence of records containing weights greater than zero,
records with weight zero should *never* be selected.

When there are no more records remaining present in the list with weights 
greater than zero (because all servers with non-zero weights, if any, 
have been tried already, and failed, and therefore removed from the list) 
any records still remaining (i.e. those with weight zero) should then be 
tried in random order.

---

Stuart Cheshire <[e-mail]>
 * Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Computer
 * Chairman, IETF ZEROCONF
 * www.stuartcheshire.org




to unsubscribe send a message to [e-mail] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.