Re: [DNSOP] Extended CNAME (ENAME)

[Masataka Ohta <[e-mail]>]

Mark Andrews wrote:

> I've updated draft-andrews-http-srv-02.
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-andrews-http-srv-02

First, as all the URIs related to SRV are URLs, the draft should
specifically say URLs, especially because non-URL URIs are
virtually dead replaced by DOIs.

Considering a possibility that a port based virtual host may
use multiple port numbers:

   If the URI does explicitly specify a port, other than the default
   port, to connect to then there is a potential conflict in the port
   specification between the URI and the SRV records, and the SRV record
   is ignored.  In this case the user agent MUST query for address
   records for the host name in the URI (instead of SRV records).

is not a good idea, which is why I suggested port number addition
in my draft.

						Masataka Ohta