Problem Statement for Fully Mapping One Name to Another Name
draft-yao-bundled-name-problem-statement-03

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2016-10-27
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text 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                                             J. Yao
Internet-Draft                                                    X. Lee
Intended status: Informational                                     CNNIC
Expires: April 30, 2017                                        J. Levine
                                                    Taughannock Networks
                                                        October 27, 2016

      Problem Statement for Fully Mapping One Name to Another Name
            draft-yao-bundled-name-problem-statement-03.txt

Abstract

   This document specifies the problems related to fully mapping one
   name to another name.  With the emergence of internationalized domain
   names and new TLDs, it is often useful to redirect one domain name
   tree fully to another domain name tree.  Current DNS protocols have
   not provided such ability to satisfy these requirements.

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 http://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 April 30, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 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
   (http://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

Yao, et al.              Expires April 30, 2017                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                    bname                     October 2016

   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Use Case 1: Bundled domain names  . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.2.  Usee Case 2: a company registers the same label in
           different TLDs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  Mapping a single name itself  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.2.  Mapping a name's descendants  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.3.  Mapping a name and and its descendants  . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.4.  Cloning a zone  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Application handling of bundled names . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   7.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   8.  Change History  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     8.1.  draft-yao-bundled-name-problem-statement: Version 00  . .   5
     8.2.  draft-yao-bundled-name-problem-statement: Version 01  . .   5
     8.3.  draft-yao-bundled-name-problem-statement: Version 02  . .   5
     8.4.  draft-yao-bundled-name-problem-statement: Version 03  . .   5
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

1.  Introduction

   With the emergence of internationalized domain names and new TLDs,
   two names may be used to identify the same thing.  In this case, it
   use useful to redirect one name space fully to another name space.
   There are many use cases for it.  Some examples are shown below.

1.1.  Use Case 1: Bundled domain names

   Bundled domain names share the same TLD but their second level labels
   are variants, or have identical second level labels in specific TLDs.
   For example, Public Interest Registry, has implemented technical
   bundling of second level domains in .NGO and .ONG.  So we have two
Show full document text