TEA Discovery: Should we be opinionated on priority of different discovery mechanisms?

[madpah]

For discussion.

The current in-draft Discovery docs cater for TWO mechanisms to discovery the TEA API for a given TEI:

1. Discovery using DNS (subject to Which DNS Record Type to use in Discovery? URI Record Type is not widely supported #64 - will be SVCB records)
2. Discovery using Host (use of AAAA or A records) to get to a WebServer at the Host so that /.well-known/tei can be accessed - this would likely produce a HTTP Redirect (301 or 302 - TBC which are permitted within TEI specification) to the TEA API

Additionally, @ppkarwasz has suggested (in #30 - now tracked in #67):

3. Discovery using Host (use of AAAA or A records) to get to a WebServer at the Host so that /.well-known/security.txt can be accessed, containing a new (yet to proposed and registered) field that provides the URL to the TEA API

When considering implementation of the TEA Specification - I would suggest it is prudent for the Specification to be opinionated on which method(s) have priority along with reasons.

FYI @oej

[oej]

I think like this:
For TEI discovery:
DNS is the best way to(provides failover etc). If that's not allowed, #2 will be used.

The security.txt case is very different as it a way to say "by the way, we have a TEA service". For that to work, there needs to be a way to get product identifiers. It requires further thinking.

[oej]

#72