In message <20140519161241.39243.qm...@joyce.lan>, "John Levine" writes: > >>> It might be worth actively pushing the CDN folks to go the SRV > >>> direction. Even if ENAME were a good idea, which is > >>>not clear to me, it's an idea that would require significant > >>> infrastructure changes, whereas SRV records appear to be > >>>functional now, with no DNS software changes. > > As I understand it, this is proposing a large DNS change as an > alternative to a modest HTTP change. Doesn't strike me as a great > tradeoff.
It's trading off a in nameserver redirection which works with wildcards to a in client redirection that doesn't work with wildcards. Everytime I have mentioned SRV records to HTTP folks they say it won't work as the extra lookup takes too long. > R's, > John > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
