[jdev] Re: Two questions regarding JEP-0124 HTTP Binding

Norman Rasmussen norman at rasmussen.co.za
Thu Nov 17 16:56:15 CST 2005


yup, that was my confusion.

The reason why i think TXT records should be authoritative (if they
exist), is that it's a nice way for a server admin to say: 'don't try
tcp, it won't work'.  It would save the client the SRV lookup (two if
the legacy jabber service is checked), plus the 'default port'
connection attempt.

The bonus/problem with this is that the DNS admin MUST add the tcp
record, otherwise tcp will not be used.  (This is not really a
bad-thing(tm))

On 11/18/05, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at jabber.org> wrote:
> Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > Norman Rasmussen wrote:
> >> I don't mind if it's 'SHOULD or MUST' NOT,  but I think that
> >> '_xmppconnect IN TXT "_xmpp-client-tcp"' should be removed from the
> >> list of Example 1. TXT Resource Records, and perhaps listed directly
> >> with Business Rule 3.1
> >
> > Oh, I see what you mean. All that the TXT record says is: "Among the
> > connection methods I support is _xmpp-client-tcp, but if you want to
> > know the port number then use the usual SRV lookup mechanism". However,
> > the TXT records provide a complete list of the supported connection
> > methods. Is that confusing? I suppose it is possible for the TXT records
> > and SRV records to get out of sync in this case as well (though it's
> > just as possible for the TXT record to say that a WAP connection method
> > is supported and for the WAP admin to shut that off, so I don't know
> > that the two cases are all that different).
>
> Hmm, now that I think about it some more the _xmpp-client-tcp
> information probably doesn't belong in a TXT record at all, but I'll
> talk with my co-author about that before removing it.
>
> /psa
>
>
>


--
- Norman Rasmussen
 - Email: norman at rasmussen.co.za
 - Home page: http://norman.rasmussen.co.za/



More information about the JDev mailing list