3 ms·
Yup. The fact, however, is that it is not used widely. My guess here is that we are facing a problem where requirements differ depending on the scale. We may wa
by rumcajz 14y ago
Yup. The fact, however, is that it is not used widely. My guess here is that we are facing a problem where requirements differ depending on the scale. We may want local services to register with DNS automatically as they start and be reachable within seconds (DNS-SD use case). With the services facing the outside world, standard pre-defined records with 72hr propagation time are preferable (RFC2782 use case).
Moreover, I would say there's a need for location-dependent resolving of service names to limit the availablity of local services, to return a topologically close instance of the service etc.
All in all, the problem is far from being solved yet.
- rumcajz 14y agoTo put in simply: At the moment nobody is going to create a DNS record just to create a TCP connection. Once the following works out of the box on LAN, the problem can be considered solved: s = socket (AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, 0); bind (s, "myApplication1"); ... s = socket (AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, 0); connect (s, "myApplication1"); Propagation of the name outside of the LAN may require additional administrative work. I guess nobody will complain about that.
- petersabaini 14y agoSemi-widely used I'd say. XMPP and SIP come to mind... What I like about DNS SRV is that it's standardized and relatively simple to handle, in contrast to some of the other naming schemes out there (eg. CORBA). I agree though that tools / libraries need to get better here.