Some Considerations on the Use of Domain Names Outside of the Global Public Domain Name System
draft-stw-whatsinaname-02

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2018-03-05
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Working Group                                           S. Woolf
Internet-Draft                                             March 5, 2018
Intended status: Informational
Expires: September 6, 2018

  Some Considerations on the Use of Domain Names Outside of the Global
                       Public Domain Name System
                       draft-stw-whatsinaname-02

Abstract

   From time to time, networking protocols need to be able to name
   things used within the protocol, and resolve the names created or
   referenced.  It's common for protocol designers to attempt to use
   domain names as the starting point for their systems of names, and
   the DNS protocol as the starting point for name resolution.  Such re-
   use of DNS naming and resolution conventions can cause issues if not
   carefully defined and handled, as applications and infrastructure in
   the modern Internet tend to assume that a "domain name" is an
   identifier that follows certain composition and allocation rules and
   is to be resolved by DNS protocol in the global default scope.

   This document acknowledges this class of extensions to the shared
   domain namespace and considers a framework for the properties a
   naming and resolution convention should have in the internet protocol
   environment, including the avoidance of collision with other uses of
   the namespace.  Depending to the answers to the suggested questions,
   the answer may be that domain names will not meet the constraints at
   hand.

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 September 6, 2018.

Woolf                   Expires September 6, 2018               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft            Names Considerations                March 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
   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
   2.  How We Got Here . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.1.  Basics of Domain Names  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.2.  Implicit Context  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  Some Questions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  Framework: what are the necessary pieces? . . . . . . . . . .   9
   6.  Some Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     6.1.  Policy: The IETF and the Public DNS . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     6.2.  Operations: the Resolution Environment  . . . . . . . . .  12
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   9.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   10. Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14

1.  Introduction

   From time to time, networking protocols need to be able to name
   things used within the protocol, and resolve the names created or
   referenced.  Such identifiers may also need to be persistent in time,
   across administrative and operational realms, or other
   transformations.  Necessary operations tend to include creating,
   modifying, and deleting names, and accessing values and relationships
   that correspond to them.

   It's common for protocol designers in this predicament to attempt to
   use domain names as the starting point for their systems of names,
   and the DNS as the starting point for name resolution.  This is
   completely understandable-- domain names, and DNS resolution, are

Woolf                   Expires September 6, 2018               [Page 2]
Show full document text