Re: Service vs. Port vs. SRV (following Eliot's presentation)

At 11:03 AM -0800 11/6/06, Dave Crocker wrote:

>  SRV clearly serves as a more generalized and long-term mechanism 
> for defining a service (and, gosh, doesn't that make the choice of 
> the RR's name particularly nice?)
>
>  As Eliot notes, however, this builds a dependency on the DNS into 
> the underlying construct of IP-to-IP rendezvous.  While most of the 
> Internet use today already has that dependency as a pragmatic 
> realtion, for other reasons, it is not built into the basics of 
> Internet infrastructure as a formal requirement.
>
>  So changing our model to focus on SRV has some interesting implications.

The implications may depend on who is included in "our" (in "changing 
our model").  A lot of application-level protocols already do, as you 
note, depend on DNS.
--

-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly-selected tag: ---------------
I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to
do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.
    --Susan B. Anthony