To:
Ted Hardie <hardie@oakthorn.com>
cc:
<Mark.Andrews@isc.org>, <dnsop@cafax.se>
From:
Mats Dufberg <dufberg@nic-se.se>
Date:
Thu, 14 Feb 2002 06:49:17 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To:
<200202140452.UAA04308@geode.he.net>
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: SRV records - when?
On Feb 13, 2002, 20:52 (-0800) Ted Hardie <hardie@oakthorn.com> wrote: > This is the interesting thing: are you talking about a protocol/transport > or a service? The service "web" might be handled by http or https and > that indicated in the look up for the service (and given the possibility > of using UPGRADE, maybe even that it can be http, https, or TLS within > HTTP). The service "http", on the other hand, had better not be > handled by https. I'm talking about http and https as different services, since you must know in advance which one you are connecting to. With TLS within http that should not be needed, but that does not seem to take off. There have been objections against the clear text initialization of http/TLS model, but I do not know if they are valid. Are you updated on https vs. http/TLS? If http with TLS will replace https, then there is no need for a special https service. But if that is not the case, or if it is unclear, I think that SRV for https should be defined as a different service in the same RFC as SRV for http. Mats ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Mats Dufberg <dufberg@nic-se.se> ----------------------------------------------------------------------