> On 8 Nov 2018, at 20:13, Mark Andrews <ma...@isc.org> wrote: > >> On 9 Nov 2018, at 5:27 am, Tony Finch <d...@dotat.at> wrote: >> >> HTTP RRs risk adding a third option, where the web provider has to have >> documentation asking whether the DNS provider supports HTTP RRs and if so >> the site admin needs both these addresses and this hostname. > > The providers that use CNAME add HTTP to that description and say to add HTTP > at the zone apexes or anywhere else another record is published at the same > name.
[ I think you mean “web providers” here, i.e., not us. ] But remember: the goal is to make the DNS easier to use for people who don’t know about the restrictions on CNAMEs. Any time we say, “oh, those other people need to to explain things at greater length to make our stuff easier to use”, we are not solving the problem. The end goal is to simplify documentation used by non-experts that deals with 3rd party web providers and 3rd party DNS providers. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
