[Standards] alternate SRV records?

[Fabio Forno]

On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:
> Some scenarios...
>
>  1. Let's say you want to connect to a MUC service. Does it make sense to
>  have an SRV record for that? Such as:
>
>  _xmpp-groupchat._tcp.conference.jabber.org 5269 athena.jabber.org
>
>  2. Let's say you want to connect to a pubsub service that pumps out
>  notifications. How about this?
>
>  _xmpp-notification._tcp.pubsub.jabber.org 5269 athena.jabber.org
>
>  3. Let's say that you want to advertise a c2s or s2s port where TLS is
>  required (e.g., because you have different firewall rules for non-TLS
>  connections). How about this (some different ports)?
>
>  _xmpp-server-tls._tcp.jabber.org 5270 athena.jabber.org
>
>  _xmpp-server-tls._tcp.jabber.org 5223 athena.jabber.org


At devcon we talked about a SRV record for pure EXI c2s or s2s ports,
so that clients can avoid having both XML and EXI parsers.

-- 
Fabio Forno, Ph.D.
Bluendo srl http://www.bluendo.com
jabber id: ff at jabber.bluendo.com