Re: draft-newton-link-rr (was Re: Last Call: <draft-faltstrom-uri-10.txt> (The Uniform Resource) Identifier (URI) DNS Resource Record) to Proposed Standard

Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us> Mon, 02 March 2015 16:34 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@hxr.us>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFCE61A1A22 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 08:34:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xuf5Wwvwnjlw for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 08:34:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ie0-f182.google.com (mail-ie0-f182.google.com [209.85.223.182]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1CB51A1B23 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 08:34:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by iecrp18 with SMTP id rp18so49222199iec.9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 08:34:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=pO6Y/mi54qbB6xzTqomndCC5G663TMybskqdCEcri68=; b=DNGGaWaOL6lhf+If40buDEPF6VnX5S3u4opqs/TnKwqjLyb5LUGghUdakQjHUTj5Y5 hJQTG01hh2sS1Osqz/BvSyl3PbZuSCkZpCBXOfaTCaqeac01YwZ+T3yuImAr5Ciw3rhR Pq34JXHLe5hSD1sOXQ7nOALvrAyVW8WxydrcW4C0jK8nBG0sXh6Xt1sGl8B512Iw+bnK CIWMmPOtzrKRz+SSrLQW/35GOUOq+C8gmCa5Zjn+NSbl6+Cfls3rtNWimma4WWtXlPyR 9k5sSGsw2tcTMAFY9ytLIzby6bRfIk6atHJnt664g6LXFLdayk9EgY9QWWdAct64+X8q RIxg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkSw/xCyFXz0S8T3Tyj7TmE//YradfTCxXmd7eKtVvTvk9TklepkBJvvQ8ha6NCmoafSlZv
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.222.70 with SMTP id qk6mr21999256igc.47.1425314080095; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 08:34:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.36.120.6 with HTTP; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 08:34:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Originating-IP: [192.149.252.11]
In-Reply-To: <20150227210036.GD11145@localhost>
References: <20150127223859.28024.43756.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4257D8A3-0EFE-40E3-B0AD-8E23772B7693@mnot.net> <CAAQiQRdLvcQLskOuo7g_=SfmowCtyyF7OwWb-Y0nsRDeTdgncA@mail.gmail.com> <39D5E26A-E1FE-4C77-9624-5E9396497F65@mnot.net> <83FCB47C-ED48-4B26-B898-F1A47528595E@netnod.se> <20150227203732.GC11145@localhost> <78B5DE44-02B6-47FD-92B6-DB9E6212D7E9@netnod.se> <20150227210036.GD11145@localhost>
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 11:34:40 -0500
Message-ID: <CAAQiQRdo0zs4Z32Xmn0VpPkz=2L0mtojmxUXB3-G58vVYTEp=w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: draft-newton-link-rr (was Re: Last Call: <draft-faltstrom-uri-10.txt> (The Uniform Resource) Identifier (URI) DNS Resource Record) to Proposed Standard
From: Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us>
To: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11344d8a701767051050cba5"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/v5n5xmbi6Y0sAoW7Re12ycnQXiQ>
Cc: Patrik Fältström <paf@netnod.se>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 16:34:52 -0000

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
wrote:

> > And this is the reason I am nervous over "gopher like features" in
> > DNS. Even though I think it is good...I think it will loose...
>
> I don't think that's a good enough reason here.  There may be other
> reasons to tread carefully here.
>

Agreed. Also, it seems the horse has already left the barn. With
application selection using prefixes, etc... that goes on with SRV,
S-NAPTR, and U-NAPTR (as well as URI), there is already "negotiation stuff"
in the DNS.

-andy