[e2e] What if there were no well known numbers?

[Mikael.Latvala@nokia.com]

Getting back to the original question I would say no.

First of all, these RR-scrubbers as you call them would restore the
original network programming paradigm, i.e. e2e address transparency,
which would a make a huge difference when one considers all the problems
these udp/tcp packet manglers have created.

Don't know what you are you referring to when saying walled gardens. If
you mean architectures similar to WAP, then I would say that the use of
SRV RRs would not lead to a rapid rise in DNS-based walled gardens. If
you mean "protected" intranets, then maybe, depending on how one
interprets the word protected. One could easily complement basic SRV RR
service with some kind of an authorization mechanism where the service
provider could determine to which party the DNS server can expose the
binding between a logical service name and a port number.

IMHO the use of SRV RRs, which should be encouraged anyways, would lead
to a new breed of NAT boxes which provide service mapping using DNS SRV
RR in addition to traditional address mangling and possible firewall
functionality.

/Mikael

>Looking ahead a bit howver, if this were widely implemented, 
>what other outcomes might we see given some time?  DNS would 
>become increasingly important of course.  Maybe even enough 
>for a small boom market within that sector.  I can envision 
>companies selling boxes that "mangle" or proxy SRV responses 
>in the name of some defined site policy.
>
>In short, couldn't this, wouldn't this, lead to a rapid rise 
>in DNS- based walled gardens (or if you prefer the quick and 
>steady rise of a fractured root, eventual modus operandi) as 
>everyone moves to replace their udp/tcp packet manglers with 
>RR-scrubbers?
>
>Am I way off here?
>
>John
>