[dns-operations] Adding CNAME for the root domain issue

[Matthew Pounsett]

On 27 April 2016 at 16:35, David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:

> > As I pointed out earlier in this thread [1] (before moving it to
> dns-operations) getting the browser developers in on SRV records isn't all
> that easy.
> >
> > The applicability statement in RFC 2782 says that SRV records cannot be
> used for a protocol unless the relevant protocol spec says they can, and
> the browser developers lobby hard at the W3C to make sure that's not going
> to happen with HTTP.   We would need at least an equally strong lobbying
> effort from the DNS community to counter it, and some pretty solid
> arguments to dispel the FUD from the browsers about how it would destroy
> the Internet (or at least their market share).
>
> I thought the problem with SRV was the multiple round trips?
>

That's what it comes down to I think, yeah; the risk of another RTT ends
the world in a flaming conflagration.  Never mind that in many cases the
target host(s) will be in-zone, and therefore could be handed out in the
additional data (especially if signed), and that most of the time when the
target is out of zone they'd be following a CNAME change 5 deep into a CDN
anyway.   Especially with async queries, I don't believe there's a real
problem, just fear of one.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/dns-operations/attachments/20160427/529565e9/attachment.html>