http://disqus.com/people/6e6d5c89985a1976429d28f117eb5137/enFri, 23 Nov 2007 10:18:55 -0000http://danielrm26.disqus.com/it8217s_time_to_drop_the_8220www8221/#comment-4354916As Dan noted, it would be ok if browsers were able to use the "_http._tcp.domain-name" SRV record. The reason for the "www" is to be able to indicate on what machine the web server is, which may not be the same as the one that you want "domain-name" alone to be (because, for example, you want to be able to "ssh domain-name" to get to your router).<br><br>Moreover, SRV records let you specify not only the host to use but also the port, with priorities when using redundant servers and so on. So no, please do not drop "www" right now, instead fight for having SRV records recognized in browsers.SamWed, 25 Jul 2007 17:06:46 -0000http://phildawesstuff.disqus.com/the_factor_attraction/#comment-2753634I've used Factor in a class last year and my students were delighted to use it.SamFri, 23 Nov 2007 10:18:55 -0000http://drm.disqus.com/it8217s_time_to_drop_the_8220www8221/#comment-11163294As Dan noted, it would be ok if browsers were able to use the "_http._tcp.domain-name" SRV record. The reason for the "www" is to be able to indicate on what machine the web server is, which may not be the same as the one that you want "domain-name" alone to be (because, for example, you want to be able to "ssh domain-name" to get to your router).<br><br>Moreover, SRV records let you specify not only the host to use but also the port, with priorities when using redundant servers and so on. So no, please do not drop "www" right now, instead fight for having SRV records recognized in browsers.SamWed, 25 Jul 2007 17:06:46 -0000