Re: [dnsext] URI RRTYPE review - Comments period end Aug 15th

[Patrik Fältström <[e-mail]>]

On 26 jul 2010, at 21.43, Ted Hardie wrote:

> The template notes that the RRTYPE contains a URI, but it does not
> give any specific relationship between that URI and domain name at
> which it is found.  U-NAPTR and other ways of connecting URIs
> and domain names start from a service (or an application), and work
> their way to a URI; they start, in other words, from the relationship.

Hmm...this confuses me a bit, and it might be that you have to explain a bit more to me what you feel is missing. I have, just in case, re-read U-NAPTR, and do not see any difference.

The U-NAPTR talk about the service type, and URI talk about the prefix to the name (as in SRV), and the ultimate algorithm you use depends on the registration of that service.

> This proposal simply juxtaposes the two, and gives you no way to
> formal way to describe what relationship the URI
> stands in to the domain name at which it is found.

Can you explain more what you mean by "relationship" here? Pointing to explicit pieces in the U-NAPTR RFC would maybe be perfect, so I understand what you mean.

> If there are multiple URIs present at a domain name,
> should they be considered alternates?  Is each independent?  Is
> this based on internal structures of the data (e.g. the scheme)?  What
> does that imply if there has to be truncation in the data returned?
> What does it mean if the URI returned is a dns uri?  How about a data
> uri?

Many of these things are things that have to do with the service. Some do, I admit, imply things that are solved because of the generic description of how DDDS works, other things finally are I think unclear for URI as well as for U-NAPTR, as they might imply generic DNS issues.

I have a few other comments as well, and will complement the draft with that information (in the form of a new version).

   Patrik