Subject: [Speermint] comments on draft-creighton-khandpur-speermint-srv-naptr-use-00

From: Andrew Newton <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:51:08 -0400

I have a few comments on draft-creighton-khandpur-speermint-srv-naptr-use-00.

1) Figure 1 incorrectly describes how DNS works.  In addition, wording in 
3.2 "SPP2 MUST return at least three [NAPTR] records" makes the same 
mistake.  DNS servers don't consult SIP proxies for DNS records, nor do SIP 
proxies return DNS records.

2) MUST "SIPS+D2T" does not apply to indirect peering.  Why is this 
exception made?  Shouldn't the advice be, "SIPS+D2T" MUST be returned in the 
absence of any security at a lower layer?  Either way, there should be text 
explaining the reasoning.

3) Section 5 indicates that TTLs for SRV records should be 1 hour, 
apparently because they are more dynamic.  There is no explanation of why 
they would be more dynamic.  I have my suspicions, but a BCP ought to really 
explain the reasons behind the recommendations.  The same goes for the MUST 
as it is applied to the weight of the SRV record.

4) There is no mention of having DNS servers returning A records with the 
SRV response in order to cut down on round trips.  Nor is there discussion 
on using EDNS0 to alleviate truncation.  Finally, there is no mention of DNSSEC.

-andy

_______________________________________________
Speermint mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/speermint