DNS Scoped Data Through '_Underscore' Naming of Attribute Leaves
draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-09

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (dnsop WG)
Last updated 2018-05-22
Replaces draft-crocker-dns-attrleaf
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Best Current Practice
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd Tim Wicinski
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to "Tim Wicinski" <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
dnsop                                                         D. Crocker
Internet-Draft                               Brandenburg InternetWorking
Intended status: Best Current Practice                      May 22, 2018
Expires: November 23, 2018

    DNS Scoped Data Through '_Underscore' Naming of Attribute Leaves
                      draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-09

Abstract

   Formally, any DNS resource record may occur for any domain name.
   However some services have defined an operational convention, which
   applies to DNS leaf nodes that are under a DNS branch having one or
   more reserved node names, each beginning with an underscore.  The
   underscore naming construct defines a semantic scope for DNS record
   types that are associated with the parent domain, above the
   underscored branch.  This specification explores the nature of this
   DNS usage and defines the "DNS Global Underscore Scoped Entry
   Registry" with IANA.  The purpose of the Underscore registry is to
   avoid collisions resulting from the use of the same underscore-based
   name, for different services.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on November 23, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of

Crocker                 Expires November 23, 2018               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                DNS AttrLeaf                      May 2018

   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  _Underscore Scoping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.2.  Scaling Benefits  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  DNS Underscore Scoped Entry Registries Function . . . . . . .   4
   3.  RRset Use Registration Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.1.  DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry . . . . . . .   6
     4.2.  DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry Definition  .   7
     4.3.  Initial entries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  Guidance for Expert Review  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     7.2.  URIs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   Appendix A.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11

1.  Introduction

   The core Domain Name System (DNS) technical specifications assign no
   semantics to domain names or their parts, and no constraints upon
   which resource record (RR) types are permitted to be stored under
   particular names [RFC1035], [RFC2181].  Over time, some leaf node
   names, such as "www" and "ftp" have come to imply support for
   particular services, but this is a matter of operational convention,
   rather than defined protocol semantics.  This freedom in the basic
   technology has permitted a wide range of administrative and semantic
   policies to be used -- in parallel.  DNS data semantics have been
   limited to the specification of particular resource record types, on
   the expectation that new ones would be added as needed.
   Unfortunately, the addition of new resource record types has proven
   extremely challenging, over the life of the DNS, with significant
   adoption and use barriers.

1.1.  _Underscore Scoping

   As an alternative to defining a new RR type, some DNS service
   enhancements call for using an existing resource record type, but
   specify a restricted scope for its occurrence.  Scope is meant as a
Show full document text