Skip to main content

Automatic Replication of DNS-SD Service Registration Protocol Zones
draft-lemon-srp-replication-02

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Ted Lemon , Abtin Keshavarzian , Jonathan Hui
Last updated 2022-07-11
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-lemon-srp-replication-02
Internet Engineering Task Force                                 T. Lemon
Internet-Draft                                                Apple Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track                         A. Keshavarzian
Expires: 12 January 2023                                          J. Hui
                                                                  Google
                                                            11 July 2022

  Automatic Replication of DNS-SD Service Registration Protocol Zones
                     draft-lemon-srp-replication-02

Abstract

   This document describes a protocol that can be used for ad-hoc
   replication of a DNS zone by multiple servers where a single primary
   DNS authoritative server is not available and the use of stable
   storage is not desirable.

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 12 January 2023.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2022 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 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 Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Alternatives for maintaining SRP state  . . . . . . . . .   3
       1.1.1.  Primary authoritative DNS service . . . . . . . . . .   3
       1.1.2.  Multicast DNS Advertising Proxy . . . . . . . . . . .   4
       1.1.3.  SRP Replication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  Implementation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.1.  Naming of a common service zone . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       2.1.1.  Zone name based on network name . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       2.1.2.  Zone name based on local configuration  . . . . . . .   6
       2.1.3.  Zone name based on DNS-SD discovery . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.2.  Advertising one's own replication service . . . . . . . .   7
     2.3.  Discovering other replication services  . . . . . . . . .   8
     2.4.  Startup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       2.4.1.  Determining an SRP zone name  . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       2.4.2.  Determining a Dataset ID  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     2.5.  Discovering the addresses of partners . . . . . . . . . .  10
     2.6.  Partner ID  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     2.7.  Establishing Communication with a replication partner . .  10
     2.8.  Incoming connections  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     2.9.  Initial synchronization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       2.9.1.  Sending candidates  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     2.10. Routine Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   3.  Protocol Details  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     3.1.  DNS Stateful Operations considerations  . . . . . . . . .  13
       3.1.1.  DSO Session Establishment . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
       3.1.2.  DSO Session maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     3.2.  SRPL Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
       3.2.1.  SRPL Session  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
       3.2.2.  SRPL Send Candidates  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
       3.2.3.  SRPL Candidate  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
       3.2.4.  SRPL Host . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     3.3.  DSO Secondary TLVs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
       3.3.1.  SRPL Candidate Yes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
       3.3.2.  SRPL Candidate No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
       3.3.3.  SRPL Conflict . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
       3.3.4.  SRPL Hostname . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
       3.3.5.  SRPL Host Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
       3.3.6.  SRPL Time Offset  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
       3.3.7.  SRPL Key ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
       3.3.8.  SRPL New Partner  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   5.  Delegation of 'local.arpa.' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
     6.1.  'srpl-tls' Service Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
     6.2.  DSO TLV type code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

     6.3.  Registration and Delegation of 'local.arpa' as a
           Special-Use Domain Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
   7.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
   8.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24

1.  Introduction

   The DNS-SD Service Registration Protocol provides a way for network
   services to update a DNS zone with DNS-SD information.  SRP uses
   unicast DNS Updates, rather than multicast DNS, to advertise
   services.  This has several advantages over multicast DNS:

   *  Reduces reliance on multicast

   *  Reduces traffic to devices providing services, which may be
      constrained devices operating on battery power

   *  Allows the advertisement of services on one network link to
      consumers of such services on a different network link

1.1.  Alternatives for maintaining SRP state

1.1.1.  Primary authoritative DNS service

   Ideally, SRP updates a primary authoritative DNS server for a
   particular zone.  This DNS server acts as the sole source of truth
   for names within the DNS zone in which SRP services are published.
   Redundancy is provided by secondary DNS servers, if needed.  However,
   this approach has some drawbacks.

   First, it requires 100% availability on the part of a DNS primary
   authoritative server for the zone.  If the primary server is not
   available for some period of time, new services appearing on the
   network cannot be registered until primary authoritative service is
   restored.

   The second drawback is that there is no automatic method for managing
   DNS authoritative service.  This means that such a service requires
   an operator to set it up.  What it means to set up such a service is
   that the following capabilities are provided:

   *  An host must be available to act as a primary authoritative DNS
      server

   *  The zone advertised by that server must be delegated, so that the
      local resolver can successfully answer queries in that zone

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

   *  The local resolver must be able to provide local browsing domain
      advertisements (Section 11 of [RFC6763]).

1.1.2.  Multicast DNS Advertising Proxy

   An existing alternative to the use of DNS authoritative services for
   advertising SRP registrations the advertising proxy [draft-tlsc-
   advertising-proxy].  An advertising proxy advertises the contents of
   the SRP update zone using multicast DNS on links on which the need
   for such advertisements is anticipated.  This works well for stub
   networks [draft-lemon-stub-networks], where services advertised on
   the stub network must be visible both on the stub network and on the
   adjacent infrastructure network, but do not generally need to be
   discoverable on other networks.

   One drawback of the advertising proxy model, however, is that there
   is no shared database from which to advertise services registered by
   SRP.  As a consequence, some of the guarantees provided by SRP,
   particularly first come, first served naming [draft-ietf-dnssd-srp].
   Because advertising proxies are set up automatically on an ad-hoc
   basis, coordination between advertising proxies is not present, which
   means that if two devices claim the same name, but register with
   different SRP servers, the conflict is not detected until the service
   is advertised using mDNS.  In practice, this results in frequent
   renaming of services, which means that consumers of services need to
   carefully follow each service that they use as the name changes over
   time.

   An additional drawback is that, from the perspective of the SRP
   client, SRP service is not unified: SRP servers tend to come and go,
   and whenever the SRP service with which a particular client has
   registered goes offline, the client has to notice that this has
   happened, discover a new SRP server, and re-register, or else it
   becomes unreachable.

1.1.3.  SRP Replication

   This document describes a replication mechanism which eliminates the
   need for a single authoritative source of truth, as in the Primary
   Authoritative DNS model, while eliminating the drawbacks of the
   Advertising Proxy model.  SRP Replication servers discover each other
   automatically.  Each replication server maintains a copy of the SRP
   zone which is kept up to date on a best-effort basis.

   SRP Replication has several benefits:

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

   *  As long as one SRP replication partner remains online at all
      times, SRP state is maintained when individual SRP replication
      partners go offline

   *  Name collisions when SRP clients change servers are avoided

   *  SRP service on a stub network can appear as an anycast service, so
      that SRP clients do not see an apparent change in servers and re-
      register when the server with which they most recently registered
      goes offline

2.  Implementation

   SRP Replication relies on the fact that any given client is always
   registering with exactly one SRP server at any given time.  This
   means that when an SRP server receives an SRP update from a client,
   it can be sure that no other SRP server has a more recent version of
   that SRP client's registration.  Consequently, that SRP server can
   behave as if it is the source of truth for that client's
   registration, and other SRP servers can safely assume that any data
   they have about the client that is less recent can be replaced with
   the new registration data.

2.1.  Naming of a common service zone

   In order for SRP replication partners to replicate a zone, they must
   agree upon a common name for the zone.  We will describe two
   mechanisms for agreeing on a common zone here.

2.1.1.  Zone name based on network name

   Network names aren't guaranteed to be unique, but tend to be unique
   for any given site.  In the case of ad-hoc (permissionless) SRP-based
   service, such as an advertising proxy or an authoritative service
   using a locally-served zone [https://www.iana.org/assignments/
   locally-served-dns-zones/locally-served-dns-zones.xhtml], because the
   DNS zone name isn't required to be globally unique, a zone name based
   on the network name is an easy solution to generating a unique zone
   name.

   When generating a zone name based on a network name, the zone name
   could be based on a locally configured global zone name, e.g.
   'example.com'.  It could be based on a locally-managed locally-served
   name, e.g. 'home.arpa'.  Or it could be based on an unmanaged
   locally-served name, for which we propose to use the root name
   'local.arpa.'  For the rest of this section we will assume that the
   specific setting determines which of these domains will be used, and
   refer to whichever domain that is as DOMAIN.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

   For zone names based on the network name, the network type should be
   used as a differentiator, in case there are two different local
   network types with the same name.  So, for example, 'WiFi.DOMAIN.'

2.1.1.1.  Zone name based on WiFi SSID

   If the zone being represented is a WiFi network, then the zone name
   for the network should be constructed using the WiFi SSID followed by
   'WiFi.DOMAIN'.  For example, if the SSID is "Example Home" then the
   zone name would be 'Example Home.WiFi.DOMAIN.'  Note that spaces and
   special characters are allowed in domain names.

2.1.1.2.  Zone name based on Thread network name

   If the zone being represented is a Thread [Thread] network, then the
   zone name for the network should be constructed using the Thread
   network name.  For example, if the Thread network name is
   "openthread" then the zone name would be 'openthread.thread.DOMAIN.'

2.1.2.  Zone name based on local configuration

   The above examples assume that it makes sense for each separate
   subnet to be its own separate zone.  However, since SRP guarantees
   name uniqueness using the first-come, first-served mechanism, it
   doesn't rely on mDNS's guarantee of per-link uniqueness.
   Consequently, it is not required that an SRP zone be constrained to
   the set of services advertised on a single link.  For this reason,
   when it is possible to know that some set of links are all managed by
   the same set of SRP replication partners, and a name is known for
   that set of links, that name can be used.  To avoid possible
   collisions, the subdomain 'srp' is used to indicate that this zone is
   an SRP zone.  So in this case the link name would be the locally-
   known shared name, followed by 'srp.DOMAIN.'

   An example of such a scenario would be Apple's HomeKit, in which all
   HomeKit accessories, regardless of which home network link they are
   attached to, all are shared in the same namespace.  Suppose the
   HomeKit home's name is "Example Home".  In such a situation, the
   domain name 'Example Home.srp.DOMAIN' could be used.

2.1.3.  Zone name based on DNS-SD discovery

   Another option for naming the local SRP Replication zone would be to
   use DNS-SD advertisements.  This is particularly useful since each
   SRP replication partner advertises itself using DNS-SD, so there is a
   convenient place to put this information.  To advertise a zone name
   based on DNS-SD discovery, the SRP replication partner should add two
   fields to the TXT record of the service instance.  The first field is

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023                [Page 6]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

   the domain field: 'domain=name'.  This indicates a proposed SRP
   replication zone name.  The second is the join field.  If 'join=yes'
   then other SRP replication servers are encouraged to use the domain
   name that appears in the domain field rather than creating a new
   domain.

2.2.  Advertising one's own replication service

   An SRP replication service operating in the "routine operation" state
   (Section 2.10) advertises its replication service.

   SRP replication service is advertised using DNS-SD [RFC6763].  The
   service name is '_srpl-tls._tcp'.  Each SRP replication partner
   should have its own hostname, which when combined with the service
   instance name and the local DNS-SD domain name will produce a service
   instance name, for example 'example-host._srpl-tls._tcp.local.'  The
   domain under which the service instance name appears will be 'local'
   for mDNS, and will be whatever domain is used for service
   registration in the case of a non-mDNS local DNS-SD service.

   SRP replication uses DNS port 853 [RFC7858] and is based on DNS
   Stateful Operations [RFC8490].  Therefore, the SRV record for the
   example we've given would be:

   example-host._srpl-tls._tcp.local.  IN SRV 0 0 853 example-
   host.local.

   The TXT record for SRP replication advertises the following fields:

   did  a 64-bit number encoded as hexadecimal ASCII.  The dataset ID
      used by SRP servers to establish a common SRP dataset for a domain
      as described in Section 2.4.2.

   join  'yes' or 'no'.  Indicates whether other SRP replication servers
      are invited to join in replicating the dataset.

   pid  a 64-bit number encoded as hexadecimal ASCII.  The partner ID to
      uniquely identify a SRP partner, as described in Section 2.6.

   dn  the domain name that this dataset is intended to represent

   So in our example, the TXT record might look like this:

   \031dn=openthread.thread.home.arpa.\020did=eb5bb51919a15cec\020pid=2c
   de2bed200126af\008join=yes

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023                [Page 7]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

   (Note that each name/value pair in the TXT record is length-encoded,
   so the '\031`, the two '\020', and the '\008' are the lengths of the
   name/value pairs.)

2.3.  Discovering other replication services

   SRP Replication is a cooperative process.  In order to ensure
   cooperation between SRP replication partners on a link, it is
   necessary that each replication partner be aware of other potential
   partners.  This is accomplished by maintaining a continuous browse
   for services of the service type "_srpl-tls._tcp".

   An SRP Replication Partner MUST maintain an ongoing DNS-SD browse on
   the service name '_srpl-tls._tcp' within the local browsing domain.
   The ongoing browse will produce two different types of events: 'add'
   events and 'remove' events.  When the browse is started, it should
   produce an 'add' event for every SRP replication partner currently
   present on the network, including the partner that is doing the
   browsing.  Whenever a partner goes offline, a 'remove' event should
   be produced. 'remove' events are not guaranteed, however.

   When a new service is added, the SRP partner checks to see if it is
   in a compatible domain.  If the SRP partner has a domain to
   advertise, it compares that domain to the domain advertised in the
   added service instance: if they are not the same, then this instance
   is not a candidate for connection, and should be ignored.

2.4.  Startup

   When a partner starts SRP Replication, it enters the "startup" state
   and picks a random discovery time interval uniformly selected from
   the range [MIN_PARNTER_DISCOVERY_INTERVAL,
   MAX_PARTNER_DISCOVERY_INTERVAL].  The recommended minimum and maximum
   values are 4 and 7.5 seconds, respectively.

   When the discovery time interval expires, the SRPL partner
   transitions to the "routine operation" state (Section 2.10) after it
   has either successfully synchronized with or
   NUM_DISCOVERY_SYNC_ATTEMPTS have occurred with each discovered
   partner.  If the partner did not discover any other SRPL partners to
   synchronize with, it immediately transitions to the "routine
   operation" state.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023                [Page 8]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

2.4.1.  Determining an SRP zone name

   An SRPL partner attempts to synchronize with other partners
   advertising the same domain.  If the SRPL partner is not configured
   with a domain name, and is therefore willing to join an existing
   domain, it adopts the first domain name with joining enabled it
   discovers.  During the remainder of the discovery time interval, the
   SRPL partner attempts to synchronize with other partners advertising
   the same domain name.  When the SRPL partner transitions to the
   "routine operation" state, it will advertise the adopted domain name
   and sets the 'join=yes' key/value pair in the TXT record.

   When the discovery time interval expires, if the SRPL partner is not
   configured with a domain name and was not able to adopt a domain
   name, it MUST select a zone name using one of the methods mentioned
   previously in Section 2.1.

2.4.2.  Determining a Dataset ID

   The dataset ID is a 64-bit number that identifies the set of data
   replicated by a set of cooperating SRPL partners.  Ideally, there
   should be exactly one dataset ID per domain.  However, it is possible
   for several independent sets of SRPL partners to replicate a
   particular domain, for example when some SRPL partners are unable to
   discover each other.  When the SRPL partners are able to discover
   each other again, the sets of partners must converge on a single
   dataset using the dataset ID.

   If an SRPL partner does not discover any other partners advertising
   the same domain in the "startup" state Section 2.4, it generates a
   new dataset ID when entering the "routine operation" state.  SRPL
   partners MUST persist the highest (most significant byte or MSB) of
   the dataset ID in non-volatile memory.  When generating a new dataset
   ID, the partner MUST increment the MSB of last used dataset ID to use
   as MSB of new dataset ID and populate the lower 56 bits randomly
   using a high-quality random number generator [RFC4086].  If there is
   no previously saved ID, then the partner randomly generates the
   entire 64-bit ID.

   When multiple dataset IDs exist for a given domain, the largest
   dataset ID is the preferred dataset ID.  Implementations MUST follow
   the Serial Number Arithmetic as defined in [RFC1982] when comparing
   two dataset IDs.  When using Serial Number Arithmetic with three or
   more IDs, it is possible that the largest value may not be well-
   defined (it is possible to have three IDs each being "larger" than
   another one).  In this case, the dataset ID that is largest using
   absolute value comparison is the preferred dataset ID.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023                [Page 9]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

   If at any time (regardless of "startup" or "routine operation" state)
   an SRPL partner discovers that it is synchronizing with a non-
   preferred dataset ID, it MUST abandon that dataset, re-enter the
   "startup" state, and attempt to synchronize with the (newly
   discovered) preferred dataset id.

2.5.  Discovering the addresses of partners

   When a partner is discovered, two new ongoing mDNS queries are
   started on the hostname indicated in the SRV record of the partner:
   one for A records, and one for AAAA records.  Each time an address
   'add' event is seen, either for an 'A' record or an 'AAAA' record,
   the partner adds the address to the list of addresses belonging to
   that partner.

2.6.  Partner ID

   The partner ID is a 64-bit number associated with an SRPL partner.
   Upon entering the "startup" state, the partner MUST generate a random
   ID using a high-quality random number generator [RFC4086].  If a
   partner restarts SRP replication operation it MUST select a new
   random ID.

   The likelihood of partner ID conflict is small.  However, if an SRPL
   partner discovers another partner using the same ID, the partner MUST
   restart SRP replication operation, which triggers it to pick a new
   random ID.

2.7.  Establishing Communication with a replication partner

   When an address is added to a partner's address list, the partner
   first checks to see if the address is one of its own addresses.  If
   so, then the partner is marked "me", and no connection is attempted
   to it.  This is somewhat safer than comparing hostnames, since a
   hostname collision can result in renaming.

   If the partner is not marked "me", then the partner checks to see if
   it has an existing connection to that partner.  If it does not, then
   it checks to see whether it has disabled outgoing connections to that
   partner.  If not, then it determines whether it should initiate a
   connection on the new address.

   While a partner is in the "startup" state (Section 2.4) it initiates
   connections with the other discovered partners.  In the "startup"
   state, the partner does not advertise its SRP replication service so
   other partners cannot discover it over DNS-SD.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 10]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

   If the partner is in the "routine operation" state, it uses the
   partner ID to determine which partner should initiate the connection.
   If the partner determines that its own partner ID is larger, it MUST
   initiate the connection.  Otherwise, the partner MUST NOT initiate
   the connection.  Implementations MUST follow the Serial Number
   Arithmetic as defined in [RFC1982] when comparing two partner IDs.

   When a connection fails and if there are multiple addresses
   associated with partner, the connecting partner advances to the next
   address in the list.  If there are no remaining addresses, the
   partner sets a timer for RECONNECT_INTERVAL seconds.  When this timer
   expires, it starts again at the beginning of the list and attempts to
   connect to the first address, iterating again across the list until a
   connection succeeds or it runs out of addresses.

   Additionally, when an address is added, it is checked against the
   list of unidentified incoming connections.  If a match is found, and
   the partner is marked "me," then the unidentified connection is
   removed from the list and dropped.  Otherwise, it is attributed to
   the matching partner, and the protocol is started at the point of
   receiving an incoming connection.

2.8.  Incoming connections

   When an incoming connection is received, it is checked against the
   partner list based on the source address of the incoming connection.
   If the address appears on the list of addresses for a partner, then
   the connection is attributed to that partner.  If there is already an
   existing connection attributed to the same partner, the partner
   processing the incoming connection MUST immediately close the
   existing connection.

2.9.  Initial synchronization

   The connecting partner begins the session by sending an SRPL Session
   message, which includes its partner ID and indicates whether or not
   it is in the "startup" state.  The receiving partner waits to receive
   the SRPL Session message.  If the message indicates that the
   connecting partner is in the "startup" state, the receiving partner
   accepts the connection.  Otherwise, the receiving partner compares
   the partner IDs as described in Section 2.7 and accepts the
   connection if its partner ID is smaller than the connecting partner's
   ID.  If the receiving partner accepts the connection, it MUST send a
   response to the SRPL Session message and waits for the connecting
   partner to request a list of update candidates.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 11]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

   The connecting partner waits for a response to the SRPL Session
   message, and when it is received, requests that the server send
   candidates.

2.9.1.  Sending candidates

   When a partner receives a "send candidates" message that it is
   expecting to receive, it generates a candidate list from the list of
   known SRP clients.  This list includes SRP clients that have
   registered directly with the partner, and SRP clients that have been
   received through SRP replication updates.  Each candidate contains a
   hostname, a time offset, and a key identifier.

   The key identifier is computed as follows:

   uint32_t key_id(uint8_t *key_data, int key_len) {
     uint32_t key_id = 0;
     for (int i = 0; i < key_data_len; i += 4) {
       key_id += ((key_data[i] << 24) | (key_data[i + 1] << 16) |
                  (key_data[i + 2] << 8) | (key_data[i + 3]));
     }
     return key_id;
   }

   When a partner receives a candidate message during the
   synchronization process, it first searches for an SRP registration
   with a hostname that matches the hostname in the candidate message.
   It then compares the key ID to the key ID in the candidate message.
   If the key ID doesn't match, it sends back a candidate response
   status of "conflict".  If the key ID does match, it compares the time
   provided to the time the existing host entry was received.  If the
   time of the update is later, it sends a "send host" response.  If it
   is earlier or the same, it sends a "continue" response.  If there is
   no matching host entry for the candidate message, the partner sends a
   "send host" response.

   When a partner receives a candidate response with a status of "send
   host", it generates a host message, which contains the hostname, the
   time offset, and the SRP message that was received from the host.
   The partner then applies the SRP update message as if it had been
   received directly from the SRP client.  The host update time sent by
   the partner is remembered as the time when the update was received
   from the client, for the purposes of future synchronization.

   When a partner is finished iterating across its list of candidates,
   it sends a "send candidates" response.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 12]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

   When a partner receives a "send candidates" response, if it is the
   server, it sends its own "send candidates" message, and processes any
   proposed candidates.

   When a partner that is a server receives a "send candidates"
   response, it goes into the "routine operation" state.  When a partner
   that is a client sends its "send candidates" response, it goes into
   the "routine operation" state.

2.10.  Routine Operation

   During routine operation, whenever an update is successfully
   processed from an SRP client, the partner that received that update
   queues that update to be sent to each partner to which it has a
   connection, whether server or client.  If there are no updates
   pending to a particular client, the update is sent immediately.
   Otherwise, it's send when the outstanding update is acknowledged.

   When during routine operation a partner receives a host update from
   its partner, it immediately applies that update to its local SRP
   zone.  This is based on the assumption that a new update is always
   more current than a copy of the host information in its database.

3.  Protocol Details

   The DNS-SD SRP Replication Protocol (henceforth SRPL) is based on DNS
   Stateful Operations [RFC8490].  Each SRP replication partner creates
   a listener on port 853, the DNS-over-TLS [RFC7858] reserved port.
   This listener can be used for other DNS requests as well.

   Participants in the protocol are partners.  To distinguish between
   partners, the terms "partner" and "remote partner" are used.
   "Partner" refers to the partner that is communicating or receiving
   communication.  "Remote partner" refers to the other partner.
   Partners can be clients or servers: a partner that has established a
   connection to another one is a client; a partner that has received a
   connection from another one is a server.

3.1.  DNS Stateful Operations considerations

   DNS Stateful Operations is a DNS per-connection session management
   protocol.  DNS Push session management includes session establishment
   as well as session maintenance.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 13]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

3.1.1.  DSO Session Establishment

   An DSO session for an SRPL connection can be established either by
   simply sending the first SRPL message, or by sending a DSO Keepalive
   message.  Section 5.1 of [RFC8490].

3.1.2.  DSO Session maintenance

   DSO sessions can be active or idle.  As long as the SRPL protocol is
   active on a connection, the DSO state of the connection is active.
   DSO sessions require occasional keepalive messages.  The default of
   fifteen seconds is adequate for SRPL.

   An idle DSO session must persist for long enough that there is a
   chance for the browse that identifies it to succeed.  Therefore, the
   minimum DSO session inactivity timeout is
   2*UNIDENTIFIED_PARTNER_TIMEOUT seconds.

3.2.  SRPL Messages

   SRPL uses the DSO message format.  Each message begins with a Primary
   TLV and may contain secondary TLVs with additional information
   (Section 5.4 of [RFC8490]).  SRPL uses DSO request and response
   message types.  A partner receiving a DSO request is expected to send
   a DSO response with same Primary TLV.  SRPL does not define or use
   any unidirectional DSO message.

   To ensure future compatibility, when processing a received SRPL
   message, any unrecognized secondary TLVs or additional value in
   currently defined SRPL TLVs MUST be silently ignored, and the message
   is interpreted and handled as if the unrecognized parts were not
   present (Section 5.4.5 of [RFC8490]).  However, if a partner receives
   an SRPL message that does not satisfy the message format and
   processing rules specified below, it MUST treat this as a "fatal
   error" and forcibly abort the connection immediately (Section 5.3.1
   of [RFC8490]).

   The SRPL messages and their corresponding Primary TLVs are as
   follows:

3.2.1.  SRPL Session

   DSO-TYPE code: SRPLSession.  Introduces the SRPL session.  The SRPL
   session TLV contains the partner ID as an unsigned 64-bit value.  A
   SRPL Session request may include an SRPL New Partner secondary TLV.
   Inclusion of the SRPL New Partner TLV indicates whether the partner
   is in the "startup" state.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 14]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

3.2.1.1.  SRPL client behavior

   The SRPL Session request is sent by a partner acting as a client to
   its remote partner once the TLS connection to the partner, acting as
   a server, has succeeded.  The SRPL Session request establishes the
   DSO connection as an SRPL protocol connection.  If it is the first
   DSO message sent by the partner acting as a client, then it also
   establishes the DSO session.

   When the SRPL partner acting as a client receives a response to its
   SRPL Session message from server, it MUST send an SRPL Send
   Candidates request.

3.2.1.2.  SRPL server behavior

   An SRPL partner acting as a server that receives an SRPL Session
   request checks to see if the SRPL session on which it was received is
   already established.  If so, this is a protocol error, and the SRPL
   partner MUST drop the connection.

   If the SRPL Session request is establishing a new session, the server
   MUST send a SRPL Session response if either of the following
   conditions are satisfied:

   *  The SRPL Session request contains an SRPL New Partner secondary
      TLV.

   *  The SRPL Session request contains a partner ID that is larger than
      the server's (see Section 2.7).

   If none of these conditions are satisfied, this is a protocol error,
   and the SRPL partner MUST drop the connection.

3.2.2.  SRPL Send Candidates

   DSO-TYPE code: SRPLSendCandidates.  Requests the remote partner to
   send its candidates list.  The SRPL Send Candidates TLV contains no
   value.  The SRPL Send Candidates message does not include any
   secondary TLVs.

3.2.2.1.  SRPL client behavior

   An SRPL partner acting as a client MUST send an SRPL Send Candidates
   request after it has received an SRPL Session response.  It MUST NOT
   send this request at any other time.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 15]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

   An SRPL partner acting as a client expects to receive an SRPL Send
   Candidates message after it has received an SRPL Send Candidates
   response.  If it receives an SRPL Send Candidates message at any
   other time, this is a protocol error, and the SRPL partner should
   drop its connection to the server.

3.2.2.2.  SRPL server behavior

   An SRPL partner acting as a server expects to receive an SRPL Send
   Candidates request after it has sent an SRPL Session response.  If it
   receives an SRPL Candidates request at any other time, this is a
   protocol error, and it MUST drop the connection.

   An SRPL partner acting as a server MUST send an SRPL Send Candidates
   request after it has sent an SRPL Send Candidates response.

   An SRPL partner acting as a server MUST enter the "normal operations"
   state after receiving an SRPL Send Candidates response from its
   partner.

3.2.3.  SRPL Candidate

   DSO-TYPE code: SRPLCandidate.  Announces the availability of a
   specific candidate SRP client registration.  The SRPL Candidate TLV
   contains no value.

3.2.3.1.  Required secondary TLVs

   The SRPL Candidate request MUST include the following secondary TLVs:
   SRPL Hostname, SRPL Time Offset, and SRPL Key ID.

   The SRPL Candidate response MUST include exactly one of the following
   status TLVs: SRPL Candidate Yes, SRPL Candidate No, or SRPL Conflict.

3.2.3.2.  SRPL partner common behavior

   SRPL partners expect to receive SRPL Candidate messages between the
   time that they have sent an SRPL Send Candidates request message and
   the time that they have received an SRPL Send Candidates response.
   If an SRPL Candidate message is received at any other time, this is a
   protocol error, and the partner MUST drop the connection.

   Partners MUST NOT send SRPL Candidate requests if they have sent any
   SRPL Candidate or SRPL host requests that have not yet received
   responses.  Partners receiving SRPL Candidate requests when they have
   not yet responded to an outstanding SRPL Candidate request or SRPL
   Host request MUST treat this as a protocol failure and drop the
   connection.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 16]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

   When a partner receives a valid SRPL Candidate message, it checks its
   SRP registration database for a host that matches both the SRPL
   Hostname and SRPL Key ID TLVs.  If such a match is not found, the
   partner sends an SRPL Candidate response that includes the SRPL
   Candidate Yes secondary TLV.

   If a match is found for the hostname, but the Key ID doesn't match,
   this is a conflict, and the partner sends an SRPL Candidate response
   with the SRPL Conflict secondary TLV.

   If a match is found for the hostname, and the key ID matches, then
   the partner computes the update time of the candidate by subtracting
   the value of the SRPL Time Offset TLV from the current time in
   seconds.  This computation should be done when the SRPL Candidate
   message is received to avoid clock skew.  If 'candidate update time'
   - 'local update time' is greater than SRPL_UPDATE_SKEW_WINDOW, then
   the candidate update is more recent than the current SRP
   registration.  In this case, the partner sends an SRPL Candidate
   response and includes the SRPL Candidate Yes secondary TLV.  The
   reason for adding in some skew is to account for network transmission
   delays.

3.2.4.  SRPL Host

   DSO-TYPE code: SRPLHost.  Provides the content of a particular SRP
   client registration.  The SRPL Host TLV contains no value.

3.2.4.1.  Required secondary TLVs

   The SRPL Host request MUST include the following secondary TLVs: SRPL
   Hostname, SRPL Key ID, and one or more SRPL Host Message TLVs.  If an
   SRPL partner receives an SRPL Candidate request that doesn't contain
   all of these secondary TLVs, this is a protocol error, and the
   partner MUST drop the connection.

   The SRPL Host request MUST always include at least one SRPL Host
   Message TLV, which contains the most recent update the SRP server has
   received for that host.  However, in some cases an update for a host
   may update some, but not all, service instances that reference that
   host; in this case, the SRPL Host request MUST include all of the
   previously received SRP updates that would be required to reconstruct
   the current state of the host registration on the server sending the
   SRPL Host request.  SRPL Host Message TLVs MUST be ordered starting
   with the largest time offset and ending with the smallest time
   offset.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 17]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

3.2.4.2.  SRPL partner common behavior during synchronization

   SRPL partners expect to receive either zero or one SRPL Host requests
   after sending an SRPL Candidate response with a SRPL Candidate Yes
   secondary TLV.  If an SRPL Host request is received at any other time
   during initial synchronization, this is a protocol error, and the
   partner MUST drop the connection.  The only time that an SRPL Host
   request would _not_ follow a positive SRPL Candidate response would
   be when the candidate host entry's lease expired after the SRPL
   Candidate request was sent but before the SRPL Candidate response was
   received.

   SRPL partners send SRPL Host requests during synchronization when a
   valid SRPL Candidate response has been received that includes an SRPL
   Candidate Yes secondary TLV.  The host request is generated based on
   the current candidate (the one for which the SRPL Candidate request
   being responded to was send).

3.2.4.3.  SRPL partner common behavior during routine operations

   When an SRPL partner during routine operations receives and has
   successfully validated an SRP update from an SRP client, it MUST send
   that update to each of its connected partners as an SRPL Host
   request.  If the connection to a particular partner is not busy, and
   there are no updates already queued to be sent, it MUST send the SRPL
   Host message immediately.  Otherwise, it MUST queue the update to
   send when possible.  The queue MUST be first-in, first-out.

   After an SRPL partner has sent an SRPL Host request to a partner, and
   before it receives a corresponding SRPL Host response, it MUST NOT
   send any more SRPL Host messages to that partner.

   When an SRPL partner receives an SRPL Host request during routine
   operations, it MUST apply it immediately.  While it is being applied,
   it MUST NOT send any other SRPL Host requests to that partner.

   When an SRPL Host request has been successfully applied by an SRPL
   partner, the partner MUST send an SRPL Host response.

   If an SRPL partner receives an SRPL Host request while another SRPL
   Host request is being processed, this is a protocol error, and the
   partner MUST drop the connection to its partner.

3.3.  DSO Secondary TLVs

   In addition to the Primary TLVs used to send requests between SRPL
   partners, we define secondary TLVs to carry additional information
   needed for various SRPL requests.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 18]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

3.3.1.  SRPL Candidate Yes

   DSO-TYPE code: SRPLCandidateYes.  It contains no value.  In an SRPL
   Candidate response, indicates to the partner that an SRPL Host
   message for the candidate is wanted and should be sent.

   Appears as a secondary TLV in SRPL Candidate responses.  MUST NOT
   appear in any other SRPL request or response.  MUST NOT appear in
   addition to either SRPL Conflict or SRPL Candidate No secondary TLVs.

3.3.2.  SRPL Candidate No

   DSO-TYPE code: SRPLCandidateNo.  It contains no value.  In an SRPL
   Candidate response, indicates to the partner that an SRPL Host
   message for the candidate is not wanted and should not be sent.

   Appears as a secondary TLV in SRPL Candidate responses.  MUST NOT
   appear in any other SRPL request or response.  MUST NOT appear in
   addition to either SRPL Conflict or SRPL Candidate Yes secondary
   TLVs.

3.3.3.  SRPL Conflict

   DSO-TYPE code: SRPLConflict.  It contains no value.  In an SRPL
   Candidate response, indicates to the partner that an SRPL Host
   message for the candidate is not wanted and should not be sent.
   Additionally indicates that the proposed host conflicts with local
   data.  This indication is informative and has no effect on
   processing.

   Appears as a secondary TLV in SRPL Candidate responses.  MUST NOT
   appear in any other SRPL request or response.  MUST NOT appear in
   addition to either SRPL Candidate Yes or SRPL Candidate No secondary
   TLVs.

3.3.4.  SRPL Hostname

   DSO-TYPE code: SRPLHostname.  In an SRPL Candidate or SRPL Host
   request, indicates to the partner the hostname of an SRP
   registration.  The TLV value is the hostname represented in DNS wire
   format Section 3.1 of [RFC1035].

   Required as a secondary TLV in SRPL Candidate and SRPL Host requests.
   MUST NOT appear in any other SRPL request or response.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 19]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

3.3.5.  SRPL Host Message

   DSO-TYPE code: SRPLHostMessage.  In an SRPL Host request, conveys
   four data objects in order:

   *  the lease time and key lease time returned to the client,
      represented as two unsigned 32-bit numbers in units of seconds.

   *  the time offset at which the message was received, represented as
      a 32-bit unsigned number of seconds.  The time offset is computed
      as the difference between the time when the SRPL Host Message TLV
      is being constructed for transmission, and the time when the SRP
      update contained in the SRPL Host Message was received.

   *  the SRP Update message received from the SRP client.  This
      contains the contents of the message, but not any IP, UDP, TCP or
      TLS headers that may have encapsulated it.

   The content of the SRPL Host Message is used to update the host on
   the partner receiving the request.  Note that the SRP message being
   sent can't be modified by the SRPL partner sending it, so in order to
   validate the message (assuming that the signature includes a nonzero
   time), the validation process should adjust the current time by the
   time offset included in the SRPL Time Offset TLV when comparing
   against the signature time when checking for replay attacks.  The
   computation of the current time of signing should be done when the
   message is received to avoid clock skew that might result from
   processing delays.

   Required as a secondary TLV in SRPL Host requests.  MUST NOT appear
   in any other SRPL request or response.

3.3.6.  SRPL Time Offset

   DSO-TYPE code: SRPLTimeOffset.  In an SRPL Candidate request, conveys
   the difference between the time the SRP update was received from the
   SRP client and the current time on the partner generating the
   request, in seconds.  The time offset value is represented as an
   unsigned 32-bit value

   Required as a secondary TLV in SRPL Candidate requests.  MUST NOT
   appear in any other SRPL request or response.

3.3.7.  SRPL Key ID

   DSO-TYPE code: SRPLKeyID.  In an SRPL Candidate request, conveys the
   key ID of the SRP client.  The value is an unsigned 32-bit number and
   calculated as described in Section 2.9.1.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 20]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

   Required as a secondary TLV in SRPL Candidate requests.  MUST NOT
   appear in any other SRPL request or response.

3.3.8.  SRPL New Partner

   DSO-TYPE code: SRPLNewPartnter.  It contains no value.  When included
   in an SRPL Session request, indicates that the partner is in the
   "startup" state.

   Can be optionally included as a secondary TLV in SRPL Session
   requests.  MUST NOT appear in any other SRPL request or response.

4.  Security Considerations

   SRP replication basically relies on the trustworthiness of hosts on
   the local network.  Since SRP itself relies on the same level of
   trust, SRP replication doesn't make things worse.  However, when the
   option to have a central SRP server is available, that is likely to
   be more trustworthy.

5.  Delegation of 'local.arpa.'

   In order to be fully functional, the owner of the 'arpa.' zone must
   add a delegation of 'local.arpa.' in the '.arpa.' zone [RFC3172].
   This delegation should be set up as was done for 'home.arpa', as a
   result of the specification in Section 7 of [RFC8375].

6.  IANA Considerations

6.1.  'srpl-tls' Service Name

   IANA is requested to add a new entry to the Service Names and Port
   Numbers registry for srpl-tls with a transport type of tcp.  No port
   number is to be assigned.  The reference should be to this document,
   and the Assignee and Contact information should reference the authors
   of this document.  The Description should be as follows:

   Availability of DNS-SD SRP Replication Service for a given domain is
   advertised using the "_srpl-tls._tcp.<domain>."  SRV record gives the
   target host and port where DNS-SD SRP Replication Service is provided
   for the named domain.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 21]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

6.2.  DSO TLV type code

   The IANA is requested to add the following entries to the 16-bit DSO
   Type Code Registry.  Each type mnemonic should be replaced with an
   allocated type code, both in this table and elsewhere in the
   document.  RFC-TBD should be replaced with the name of this document
   once it becomes an RFC.

    +--------------------+---------------+-------+--------+-----------+
    | Type               | Name          | Early | Status | Reference |
    |                    |               | Data  |        |           |
    +--------------------+---------------+-------+--------+-----------+
    | SRPLSession        | SRPL Session  | No    | STD    | RFC-TBD   |
    +--------------------+---------------+-------+--------+-----------+
    | SRPLSendCandidates | SRPL Send     | No    | STD    | RFC-TBD   |
    |                    | Candidates    |       |        |           |
    +--------------------+---------------+-------+--------+-----------+
    | SRPLCandidate      | SRPL          | No    | STD    | RFC-TBD   |
    |                    | Candidate     |       |        |           |
    +--------------------+---------------+-------+--------+-----------+
    | SRPLHost           | SRPL Host     | No    | STD    | RFC-TBD   |
    +--------------------+---------------+-------+--------+-----------+
    | SRPLCandidateYes   | SRPL          | No    | STD    | RFC-TBD   |
    |                    | Candidate Yes |       |        |           |
    +--------------------+---------------+-------+--------+-----------+
    | SRPLCandidateNo    | SRPL          | No    | STD    | RFC-TBD   |
    |                    | Candidate No  |       |        |           |
    +--------------------+---------------+-------+--------+-----------+
    | SRPLConflict       | SRPL Conflict | No    | STD    | RFC-TBD   |
    +--------------------+---------------+-------+--------+-----------+
    | SRPLHostname       | SRPL Hostname | No    | STD    | RFC-TBD   |
    +--------------------+---------------+-------+--------+-----------+
    | SRPLHostMessage    | SRPL Host     | No    | STD    | RFC-TBD   |
    |                    | Message       |       |        |           |
    +--------------------+---------------+-------+--------+-----------+
    | SRPLTimeOffset     | SRPL Time     | No    | STD    | RFC-TBD   |
    |                    | Offset        |       |        |           |
    +--------------------+---------------+-------+--------+-----------+
    | SRPLKeyID          | SRPL Key ID   | No    | STD    | RFC-TBD   |
    +--------------------+---------------+-------+--------+-----------+
    | SRPLNewPartnter    | SRPL New      | No    | STD    | RFC-TBD   |
    |                    | Partner       |       |        |           |
    +--------------------+---------------+-------+--------+-----------+

                                  Table 1

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 22]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

6.3.  Registration and Delegation of 'local.arpa' as a Special-Use
      Domain Name

   IANA is requested to record the domain name local.arpa.' in the
   Special-Use Domain Names registry [SUDN].  IANA is requested, with
   the approval of IAB, to implement the delegation requested in
   Section 5.

   IANA is further requested to add a new entry to the "Transport-
   Independent Locally-Served Zones" subregistry of the the "Locally-
   Served DNS Zones" registry [LSDZ].  The entry will be for the domain
   local.arpa.' with the description "Ad-hoc DNS-SD Special-Use Domain",
   listing this document as the reference.

7.  Informative References

8.  Normative References

   [RFC1035]  Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
              specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, DOI 10.17487/RFC1035,
              November 1987, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1035>.

   [RFC1982]  Elz, R. and R. Bush, "Serial Number Arithmetic", RFC 1982,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC1982, August 1996,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1982>.

   [RFC3172]  Huston, G., Ed., "Management Guidelines & Operational
              Requirements for the Address and Routing Parameter Area
              Domain ("arpa")", BCP 52, RFC 3172, DOI 10.17487/RFC3172,
              September 2001, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3172>.

   [RFC4086]  Eastlake 3rd, D., Schiller, J., and S. Crocker,
              "Randomness Requirements for Security", BCP 106, RFC 4086,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4086, June 2005,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4086>.

   [RFC6763]  Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "DNS-Based Service
              Discovery", RFC 6763, DOI 10.17487/RFC6763, February 2013,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6763>.

   [RFC7858]  Hu, Z., Zhu, L., Heidemann, J., Mankin, A., Wessels, D.,
              and P. Hoffman, "Specification for DNS over Transport
              Layer Security (TLS)", RFC 7858, DOI 10.17487/RFC7858, May
              2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7858>.

   [RFC8375]  Pfister, P. and T. Lemon, "Special-Use Domain
              'home.arpa.'", RFC 8375, DOI 10.17487/RFC8375, May 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8375>.

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 23]
Internet-Draft           DNS-SD SRP Replication                July 2022

   [RFC8490]  Bellis, R., Cheshire, S., Dickinson, J., Dickinson, S.,
              Lemon, T., and T. Pusateri, "DNS Stateful Operations",
              RFC 8490, DOI 10.17487/RFC8490, March 2019,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8490>.

   [SUDN]     "Special-Use Domain Names Registry", July 2012,
              <https://www.iana.org/assignments/special-use-domain-
              names/special-use-domain-names.xhtml>.

   [LSDZ]     "Locally-Served DNS Zones Registry", July 2011,
              <https://www.iana.org/assignments/locally-served-dns-
              zones/locally-served-dns-zones.xhtml>.

Authors' Addresses

   Ted Lemon
   Apple Inc.
   One Apple Park Way
   Cupertino, California 95014
   United States of America
   Email: mellon@fugue.com

   Abtin Keshavarzian
   Google
   1600 Amphitheatre Parkway CA 94043
   Mountain View, California 94043
   United States of America
   Email: abtink@google.com

   Jonathan Hui
   Google
   1600 Amphitheatre Parkway CA 94043
   Mountain View, California 94043
   United States of America
   Email: jonhui@google.com

Lemon, et al.            Expires 12 January 2023               [Page 24]