2004-06-03 kl. 13.03 skrev Johan Danielsson:

> Each protocol has to have a defined mechanism for how to locate its
> service. You can't just stop or start using SRV on your own, so having
> this switch under user control is rather meaningless. I think that an
> AI_SRV flag is fine (and then it should only return SRV records). Next
> step is to amend rfc2553 with it.

Well, even with the AI_SRV flag, if a service record can not be found, 
a normal lookup should be done. It's likely a service aware 
administrator would add the *._tcp and *._udp records for unprovided 
services.

I can certainly see the value of a user configurable option. The SRV 
records are compatible with existing services and if a user wants to 
use it with them, she should be able to. The RFC recommends against it, 
but doesn't forbid it. Currently we are in a situation where we often 
manually enter the service name in the host lookup (www.netbsd.org, 
ftp.sunet.se, secure.bank.com etc). SRV records offer a simplification 
over that, and to require specific application support when it isn't 
needed seems unnecessary.
-- 
Pelle Johansson
<morth@morth.org>