Re: [DNSOP] Any website publishers who use CDNs on the list?

[Evan Hunt <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 10:16:25PM +0100, Måns Nilsson wrote:
> At the risk of sounding like a repetitive bore, what is actually needed
> is a way to say "for that domain name, apex or not, https[1] services are
> over there ---->". Without messing up the entire node in the tree and
> causing special processing in every name server and full service
> resolver. And without stomping the other interesting protocols that
> might like a RR on the node to be found.
> 
> The entire effect that ANAME is supposed to have is achieved easier 
> by publishing URI records. And by getting web browsers to ask for URI
> first.

Speaking as a co-author of ANAME, I agree about this. URI, SRV, a proposed
new HTTP RRtype, whatever - service lookup is absolutely the correct way to
accomplish this goal.

However, browser vendors are *not doing that*, and I've given up hope that
they ever will. Trying to out-stubborn them has been ineffective.

So vendors muck around in DNS software to solve what ought to be a
non-problem, ending up with mutually-incompatible, protocol-violating
bodges - apex CNAME, ALIAS, etc.  ANAME is an effort to unify these
various approaches into a standards-compliant, portable bodge.

Elegant it isn't, but if we don't standardize ANAME, the existing bodges
will persist.  Browser vendors want the DNS to give them addresses, and
only addresses.

If you can get them to change their minds, though, I wish you all success.

-- 
Evan Hunt -- [e-mail]
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.