manning wrote: > Hum… “domain-looking-string” … Per RFC 1945, we read: > "3.2.2 http URL > > > The "http" scheme is used to locate network resources via the HTTP > protocol. This section defines the scheme-specific syntax and > semantics for http URLs. > > http_URL = "http:" "//" host [ ":" port ] [ abs_path ] > > host = <A legal Internet host domain name > or IP address (in dotted-decimal form), > as defined by > Section 2.1 of RFC 1123 > > > > port = *DIGIT” > > So then the question on the table is, What is a “legal host domain name”? > RFC 1123, using SMTP as the example, says: > > "5.3.5 Domain Name Support > > SMTP implementations MUST use the mechanism defined in > Section 6.1 for mapping between domain names and IP addresses. This > means that every Internet SMTP MUST include support for the > Internet DNS.” > > This STRONGLY suggests that “domain-looking-string” is , in fact, a host > that is identified using the Internet DNS.
Have a look at the later HTTP/1.1 RFCs (7230) and the URI generic syntax RFC (3986). RFC 7230 defines http URIs, but it relies on the URI generic syntax (RFC 3986) to define "uri-host"'s, and that specification explicitly declines to require that "domain-looking-strings" be Internet DNS names: 3.2.2. Host [...] This specification does not mandate a particular registered name lookup technology and therefore does not restrict the syntax of reg- name beyond what is necessary for interoperability. Instead, it delegates the issue of registered name syntax conformance to the operating system of each application performing URI resolution, and that operating system decides what it will allow for the purpose of host identification. A URI resolution implementation might use DNS, host tables, yellow pages, NetInfo, WINS, or any other system for lookup of registered names. However, a globally scoped naming system, such as DNS fully qualified domain names, is necessary for URIs intended to have global scope. URI producers should use names that conform to the DNS syntax, even when use of DNS is not immediately apparent, and should limit these names to no more than 255 characters in length. [...] -- Robert Edmonds _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
