Indication of Local DNS Privacy Service During User Access
draft-yan-dprive-local-service-indication-04
Dprive Working Group Z. Yan
Internet-Draft CNNIC
Intended status: Standards Track G. Geng
Expires: June 16, 2021 Jinan University
Y. Liu
CAICT
X. Zhang
Shandong Computer Science Center
X. Zhu
Shandong Institute of Big Data
December 13, 2020
Indication of Local DNS Privacy Service During User Access
draft-yan-dprive-local-service-indication-04
Abstract
This document aims to support the indication of privacy service
capability of recursive resolver during the end-user accesses the
network.
Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL","SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]
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 June 16, 2021.
Yan, et al. Expires June 16, 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Indication of DNS Privacy Service December 2020
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 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. ICMPv6 based case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. DHCPv6 based case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1. Introduction
In order to enhance the privacy protection in DNS, several solutions
have been developed to support the encrypted communications between
stub and recursive resolvers, such as DNS-over-DTLS [RFC8094], DNS-
over-TLS [RFC7858], DNS-over-QUIC and so on. However, a scheme is
needed in order to explicitly make the end-user (stub resovler) be
aware of the types of privacy service supported by the recursive
resolver in order to avoid the blind attempt by the end-user and
support the user to bootstrap the preferred privacy protocol more
easily. This can be achieved during the user initial access, using
extended DHCPv6 or ICMPv6 to configure its recursive resolver with
related information (only IPv6 scenario is considered herein).
2. ICMPv6 based case
The "Recursive DNS Server Option" is defined in [RFC8106] to support
the user to configure DNS recursive resolver in the IPv6 SLAAC mode.
Then a 4-bit (for example) space (denoted as "Cap." field) in the
Reserved field of "Recursive DNS Server Option" can be used to
indicate the privacy service of the corresponding recursive resolver
specified in the field of "Addresses of IPv6 Recursive DNS Servers".
However, if this function is used, the "Addresses of IPv6 Recursive
Yan, et al. Expires June 16, 2021 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Indication of DNS Privacy Service December 2020
DNS Servers" should contain only the recursive resolver(s) with the
same privacy service capability indicated by the corresponding "Cap."
Show full document text