Re: [DNSOP] Fwd: HTTPSSVC record draft

[Tim Wicinski <[e-mail]>]

Will AWS Support this?

That seems to be all I see deployed now

On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 8:44 PM Paul Vixie <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>
> Joe Abley wrote on 2019-07-09 17:35:
> > On Jul 9, 2019, at 20:11, Paul Vixie <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> >> everything other than HTTPS can just use SRV.
> >>
> >> ANAME is (should be) toast(ed).
> >
> > Didn't we get to this point by acknowledging that there was a gap
> > between now and the glorious future where SRV and unnamed alternatives
> > for HTTPS, and that the gap was already being filled by multiple,
> > different, ANAME-looking things?
>
> not i.
>
> SRV was good enough for HTTP. it was designed after HTTP, for HTTP. the
> reason it wasn't deployed for HTTP has nothing to do with the things
> that make HTTPSSVC necessary for HTTPS. (we would still need HTTPSSVC
> for HTTPS even if HTTP had adopted SRV.)
>
> >
> > The point of ANAME was to give us some multi-provider/Interop options
> > while the trucks roll, I thought. They are not fast trucks. It has
> > taken 23 years to get from RFC 2052 to here.
>
> the web browsing community has very fast trucks. what was a concern for
> the older, larger application-independent "Internet" is not for this. if
> IETF and W3C agree that HTTPSSVC is the way forward, it'll be used for
> 50% or more of all web transactions within a year, and 90% within five
> years.
>
>
> --
> P Vixie
>
>