[Standards] RFC 3920, 10.2/10.3: subdomain routing rules

Justin Karneges justin-keyword-jabber.093179 at affinix.com
Tue Mar 27 16:39:51 UTC 2007


On Tuesday 27 March 2007 7:27 am, Tony Finch wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > Please refer to rfc3920bis, which contains all the errata and corrections
> > and clarifications we have discussed so far:
> >
> > http://www.xmpp.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-rfc3920bis-01.html
>
> Why treat subdomains specially? Are special services required to be
> subdomains of the server's main domain? Can't a server be MUC-only (say)
> or have two domains users.example.com and muc.example.com?
>
> The way I look at it is: A server has a number of configured domains.
> These may be services (e.g. MUC) or virtual domains for normal user JIDs.
> They need not have any textual relationship with each other.
>
> There are a couple of comments, in sections 3.2 and C.4, which seem to
> imply that routing of subdomains was special in pre-SRV Jabber, so would
> I be right to guess that this is a historical artefact?

The only "special" routing that I'm aware of, is that if a domain resolves to 
the same IP address as one which you already have an active dialback s2s 
stream with, then you can initiate a new dialback right over the existing 
stream.  (Server guys: correct me if I'm wrong).

In the old days it was very common for subdomains to all point to the same IP 
address as the base domain, however I don't think there was any protocol 
specifically for subdomains.

I, too, don't understand why the RFC even mentions subdomains at all.

-Justin



More information about the Standards mailing list