Subject: [hybi] New issue: SRV record lookup

From: Dave Cridland <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 16:01:06 +0100

I have a nagging feeling I've mentioned this before buried somewhere  
deep, but...

Our current protocol description piggybacks on HTTP, and is intended  
to be served from (or via) the existing HTTP infrastructure.

This is fine and good, but in practise, I believe we'll see an  
advantage in mid-size deployments to move websocketry off the HTTP  
server entirely. (Huge deployments, like Google, presumably do this  
in infrastructure relatively painlessly).

If we mandate that browsers need to perform SRV lookup with an A  
record fallback, then I believe we'll allow this to happen quite  
easily.

Are there any objections to - at the least - raising this as a new  
issue?

Dave.
-- 
Dave Cridland - mailto:[email-masked] - xmpp:[email-masked]
  - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
  - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 09:39:06 -0600

On 8/16/10 9:01 AM, Dave Cridland wrote:
> Our current protocol description piggybacks on HTTP, and is intended to
> be served from (or via) the existing HTTP infrastructure.
> 
> This is fine and good, but in practise, I believe we'll see an advantage
> in mid-size deployments to move websocketry off the HTTP server
> entirely. (Huge deployments, like Google, presumably do this in
> infrastructure relatively painlessly).
> 
> If we mandate that browsers need to perform SRV lookup with an A record
> fallback, then I believe we'll allow this to happen quite easily.
> 
> Are there any objections to - at the least - raising this as a new issue?

Despite the fact that 80 is the One True Port, it does seem sensible
that some providers might want to use another port of their choosing,
and to make that port discoverable. SRV is probably the right way to do
that (although some would argue for a more advanced approach when a
client needs to discover not only a host+port but a full URI, such as
U-NAPTR or Patrik Fältström's proposed URI RR).

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

---

From: "Shelby Moore" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 05:30:51 -0400

I have referenced this post in another post:

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi/current/msg03304.html

Thanks for pointing out the implication is I assume all possible transport
(HTTP on port 80, TLS on port 443, UDP/TCP over new port, etc) options may
require some effort to optimize server farm scenarios.

> _______________________________________________
> hybi mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi
>
>