Deployment and Use of the Domain Name System(DNS) in Deep Space
draft-many-tiptop-dns-00
This document is an Internet-Draft (I-D).
Anyone may submit an I-D to the IETF.
This I-D is not endorsed by the IETF and has no formal standing in the
IETF standards process.
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Expired".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Marc Blanchet | ||
| Last updated | 2025-07-01 | ||
| RFC stream | (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-many-tiptop-dns-00
Internet Engineering Task Force M. Blanchet
Internet-Draft Viagenie
Intended status: Informational 1 July 2025
Expires: 2 January 2026
Deployment and Use of the Domain Name System(DNS) in Deep Space
draft-many-tiptop-dns-00
Abstract
Deep space communications involve long delays (e.g., Earth to Mars
has one-way delays 4-24 minutes) and intermittent communications,
mainly because of orbital dynamics. This document lists operational
methods to enable local DNS name resolving on celestial body networks
such that there are no real-time query and response flow to the
authoritative name servers on (Earth) Internet.
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 2 January 2026.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2025 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.
Blanchet Expires 2 January 2026 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft DNS in Deep Space July 2025
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Use Case and Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Possible Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Pre-walk of all needed names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Pre-fetch of all zones in the needed name hierarchy . . . 5
3.3. Special zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Zone Transfer Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. DNSSEC Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Crusing Spacecraft Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Network Operations Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction
Deep space communications involve long delays (e.g., Earth to Mars
has one-way delays 4-24 minutes) and intermittent communications,
mainly because of orbital dynamics. To illustrate a simple example
of intermittence, communications may be between a ground station on
Earth to an asset on a planet through the use of an orbiter around
that planet. That orbiter may have an overpass of 20 minutes every 2
hours. Therefore, continuous connectivity between the two endpoints
cannot be assumed. However, as discussed in
[I-D.many-tiptop-ip-architecture], orbiters may temporarily store IP
packets until the next communication window with the next hop
appears. From the standpoint of the transport or upper application
protocols, the one-way delay and the RTT will be stable while direct
connectivity happens, and then jump to a large value while the
orbiter is not reachable anymore, until it becomes reachable again.
In some cases, where the asset is on a shadow side of a planet or
Moon and while there is no full constellation of orbiters providing
connectivity all around, the asset and Earth ground may never or
rarely have a uninterrupted end2end path. [I-D.many-tiptop-usecase]
provides more details about key characteristics of deep space
communications and the use case of networking.
Blanchet Expires 2 January 2026 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft DNS in Deep Space July 2025
[I-D.many-tiptop-ip-architecture] discusses the use of the whole IP
stack in this context. Domain name requests and response over long
delays generate timeouts and when there is no reachability to the DNS
server, requests will not be answered. Therefore, on celestial
bodies IP networks, a local DNS infrastructure with all the needed
names and values stored locally is needed.
While this document uses deep space as the base use case, it may
apply to other "mostly" isolated networks, such as IoT networks.
Mostly isolated means that most of the time the network is isolated,
but there are times where it is not isolated and then may receive
zone transfers or other means to populate or update its name caches.
1.1. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
2. Use Case and Requirements
Given all the investment in technology, protocol, services,
infrastructure, scrutiny and governance in place, the ability to use
the current Internet DNS Root with DNSSEC even in deep space has a
lot of merit compared to starting another root with another trust
chain. In order to achive that goal, which is to keep the same DNS
root and the current DNSSEC trust chain in deep space, domain data
and all related keys necessary for local validation should also be
stored locally.
The requirements and characteristics for this document use case are:
* domains are under the unique DNS root[RFC2826]
* the DNS root is deployed under some agreed community
requirements[RFC7720]
* ability to sometimes reach the celestial body network name servers
from Earth Internet to update their data cache
* inability to do live DNS queries to the Internet DNS
infrastructure from space
* multiple network and DNS operators may exist on the celestial body
network, each managing their own namespace and/or caches
Blanchet Expires 2 January 2026 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft DNS in Deep Space July 2025
3. Possible Approaches
This section presents various approaches that should meet the
requirements set in the previous section. These approaches use the
[RFC8806] approach for root zones, but augment it for the whole
needed name hierarchy.
All approaches share similar naming infrastructure on the target
celestial body network:
* One or more authoritative name server.
* One or more resolvers using the above authoritative servers (or
additional servers) in their hints/cache file.
* hosts using the above resolvers.
* DNSSEC verifying resolvers have the root trust
anchor[trust-anchor] in their configuration.
"Target network" used in this document means the celestial body
network.
3.1. Pre-walk of all needed names
If one assumes that all names that will be used on the target network
are known in advance, then queries walking the tree from the root
down to the final name of all needed names can be done on Internet
and the responses saved in a file, together with the appropriate
DNSSEC records (TBD: should we list those: aka RRSIG, DS, DNSKEY).
The records should contain values that are relevant to the celestial
body network. For example, an IP address record such as an A or AAAA
record should resolve to an IP address relevant and reachable on the
target network.
The resulting file containing all the records is uploaded to the
authoritative name servers on the target network.
The authoritative name servers should serve the root zone and all
required domain tree records underneath as found above.
If a name used on the celestial body network by the hosts or
applications is not in the uploaded file served by the local name
servers, then the request will timeout.
If all needed DNSSEC material is not fully uploaded, then DNSSEC
validation will fail.
Blanchet Expires 2 January 2026 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft DNS in Deep Space July 2025
A method for syncing and updating all the updated records to the
isolated network should be put in place, at the appropriate
frequency. Typical DNS zone tranfer mechanism may not be suitable
because TCP transport is likely not possible in deep space. In this
case, other file transfer mechanisms may be used.
Some DNS records have values containing other names, such as the SRV
and CNAME records. The referenced names should also be "walked".
This setup somewhat assumes that there is a single operator for the
DNS authoritative infrastructure on the target network.
3.2. Pre-fetch of all zones in the needed name hierarchy
If one assumes that the name hierarchy is known for all needed names
used on the target network and if the operator of the DNS
infrastructure on the target network has access to all the zones of
the hierarchy, then these zones are saved. They may need to be
modified so that the NS glue records point to the appropriate local
authoritative name servers. These zones are then uploaded to the
authoritative name servers on the target network.
The authoritative name servers should serve the root zone and all
zones discussed above.
This approach have less risk of missing a name since all names under
the hierarchy are uploaded. However, if the zones are too big
compared to the transfer capacity to the target network, then this
solution is not appropriate. Moreover, it may be possible that most
of the names in the uploaded zones will not be used, therefore it is
a possible waste of resources (bandwidth, memory/cpu on server, ...).
Therefore, careful consideration on the chosen hierarchy, specially
the top-level domain, is relevant. Given deep space relative limited
use networks, it would make sense to dedicate some top-level domain
or subdomain for its needs. However, it is possible to remove all
the non-needed record from the zones before uploading them to the
target network DNS infrastructure, but then if some names are missing
in this removal, the same issues from the previous approach appear.
Moreover, DNSSEC validation will fail if records are removed from a
signed zone.
If all needed DNSSEC material is not fully uploaded, then DNSSEC
validation will fail.
Blanchet Expires 2 January 2026 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft DNS in Deep Space July 2025
A method for syncing and updating all the updated records to the
target network should be put in place, at the appropriate frequency.
Typical DNS zone tranfer mechanism may not be suitable because TCP
transport is likely not possible in deep space. In this case, other
file transfer mechanisms may be used.
In the context of multiple operators on the target network, each one
may do this process independently for its own zones, without having
to rely on another party.
3.3. Special zone
Instead of fetching a whole zone containing a lot of non useful
records, the manager of that zone creates a special version of the
zone containing only the useful records and sign it. It is then sent
to the target network DNS infrastructure. This approach is a
combination of the previous approaches, but require careful
management of the two versions of the zone. In terms of deployment
and operations, it has the same properties as the zone pre-fetch
approach.
4. Zone Transfer Considerations
If DNS zone transfer is possible over the link between the Internet
and the target network, then incremental zone transfer (aka IXFR)
might be advised to minimize the use of the bandwidth and also
minimize the data merge on the target DNS server.
If DNS zone transfer is not possible or not optimal, than another
file transfer mechanism should be used.
5. DNSSEC Considerations
Zones are signed at various frequencies based on the operator
policies. If a signature on a record has expired, then DNSSEC
validation will fail. Therefore, the frequency of uploading updated
records should be higher than the frequency of the signing of the
uploaded zones.
Similarly, the key lifetimes, including the root zone anchor, should
be monitored to make sure that new keys are uploaded before the old
ones expire.
Finally, the DNSSEC RR TTL values need to be longer than the update
times.
Blanchet Expires 2 January 2026 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft DNS in Deep Space July 2025
6. Crusing Spacecraft Considerations
This document assumes a minimal infrastructure on a celestial body
surface and vicinty network. As discussed in
[I-D.many-tiptop-usecase], there are other instances of IP networks
in deep space. One of them is a cruising spacecraft which has non-
continuous connectivity to Earth using a direct point-to-point link
to Earth ground stations. A cruising spacecraft typically have a
local IP network to connect the various payloads and computers
together. Names may be used on the onboard network, either by a
simple infrastructure as described in this document, or by other
simpler means such as a static file distributed on all on-board
computers. When the spacecraft lands or connects to an
infrastructure network such as a celestial body surface network, some
names may need to be updated to use the local DNS infrastructure.
The transition is not discussed in this document.
7. Network Operations Considerations
Even with careful management, there is some probability that some
applications or host on the target network will query names that were
uploaded to the local DNS infrastructure, but refer to services or IP
addresses that are not reachable from the target network. If the
target network do have intermittent IP connectivity to Internet but
the link is not appropriate for live queries, such as long delays in
deep space, costly bandwidth or very small time window of
reachability, then the network may try to route the packets to the
Internet. Therefore, a mechanisms to signal unreachability may be
appropriate to be setup at the edge of the target network.
8. IANA Considerations
This memo includes no request to IANA.
9. Security Considerations
By expanding the use of the same Internet DNS root to space, the
space IP network naming infrastructure is then secured at the same
level as on Internet.
10. References
10.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
Blanchet Expires 2 January 2026 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft DNS in Deep Space July 2025
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
10.2. Informative References
[RFC2826] IAB, "IAB Technical Comment on the Unique DNS Root",
RFC 2826, DOI 10.17487/RFC2826, May 2000,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2826>.
[RFC7720] Blanchet, M. and L. Liman, "DNS Root Name Service Protocol
and Deployment Requirements", BCP 40, RFC 7720,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7720, December 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7720>.
[RFC8806] Kumari, W. and P. Hoffman, "Running a Root Server Local to
a Resolver", RFC 8806, DOI 10.17487/RFC8806, June 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8806>.
[trust-anchor]
IANA, "Trust Anchors and Keys",
<https://www.iana.org/dnssec/files>.
[I-D.many-tiptop-usecase]
Blanchet, M., Eddy, W., and M. Eubanks, "IP in Deep Space:
Key Characteristics, Use Cases and Requirements", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-many-tiptop-usecase-03, 18
June 2025, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-
many-tiptop-usecase-03>.
[I-D.many-tiptop-ip-architecture]
Blanchet, M., Eddy, W., and T. Li, "An Architecture for IP
in Deep Space", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
many-tiptop-ip-architecture-00, 1 March 2025,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-many-tiptop-
ip-architecture-00>.
Acknowledgements
The idea of the pre-walk was suggested by Warren Kumari. The idea of
a special zone was suggested by Mark Andrews. All errors are
authors'.
Author's Address
Marc Blanchet
Viagenie
Canada
Blanchet Expires 2 January 2026 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft DNS in Deep Space July 2025
Email: marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca
Blanchet Expires 2 January 2026 [Page 9]