On 21/09/2018 19:11, JW wrote: > I also feel from this discussion, we are all roughly on the same page. > We want SRV as the long term solution ...
except that we heard at the side meeting in Montreal (albeit from browser people rather than content people) that they *don't* want SRV, because it has fields that are not compatible with the web security model. I still want to define a new RR that does have mutually agreed semantics that's specifically for use by HTTP(s), but so far no takers. Ray _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
