Network Working Group D. Crocker
Internet-Draft Brandenburg InternetWorking
Intended status: BCP April 13, 2011
Expires: October 15, 2011
DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves
draft-crocker-dns-attrleaf-05
Abstract
Historically, any DNS RR may occur for any domain name. Recent
additions have defined DNS leaf nodes that contain a reserved node
name, beginning with an underscore. The underscore construct is used
to define a semantic scope for DNS records associated with the parent
domain. This note explores the nature of this DNS usage and defines
the "underscore names" registry with IANA.
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 October 15, 2011.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 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
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Scaling Benefits and TXT and SRV Resource Records . . . . . . 4
3. Underscore DNS Registry Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. DNS Underscore Registry Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Related Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.2. References -- Informative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
1. Introduction
The core DNS technical specifications assign no semantics to domain
names or their parts, and no constraints upon which resource records
(RRs) may be associated with particular names. Over time, some leaf
node names, such as "www" and "ftp" have come to imply support for
particular services, but this is a matter of operational convention,
rather than defined protocol semantics. This freedom in the basic
technology has permitted a wide range of administrative and semantic
policies to be used -- in parallel. Data semantics have been limited
to the specification of particular resource records, on the
expectation that new ones would be added as needed.
Some recent service enhancements have defined a restricted scope for
the occurrence of particular resource records. That scope is a leaf
node, within which the uses of specific resource records can be
formally defined and constrained. The leaf has a distinguished
naming convention: It uses a reserved DNS node name that begins with
an underscore. Because host names are not allowed to use the
underscore character, this distinguishes the name from all legal host
name. Effectively, this convention creates a space for attributes
that are associated with the parent domain, one level up.
An established example is the SRV record [RFC2782] which generalizes
concepts long-used for email routing by the MX record
[RFC0974][RFC2821]. The use of special DNS names has significant
benefits and detriments. Some of these are explored in [RFC5507].
[Comment]: The terms "resolution context" and "scoping rules" have
been suggested, in place of "semantic scope". In order to avoid
concern for matters of semantics, this specification uses the term
"scoping rules", to create a focus on the mechanics being defined,
rather than nuances of interpretation for the mechanism.
The scoping feature is particularly useful when generalized resource
records are used -- notably TXT and SRV. It provides efficient
separation of one use of them from another. Absent this separation,
an undifferentiated mass of these RRs are returned to the client
which then must parse through the internals of the records in the
hope of finding ones that are relevant. With underscore-based
scoping, only the relevant RRs are returns.
This specification discusses the underscore "attribute" enhancement,
provides an explicit definition of it, and establishes an IANA
registry for the reserved names that begin with underscore.
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
Discussion Venue: Discussion about this draft is directed to the
dnsop@lists.uoregon.edu [1] mailing list of the IETF DNSOP Working
Group [2].
2. Scaling Benefits and TXT and SRV Resource Records
Some resource records are generic and support a variety of uses.
Each additional use defines its own rules and, possibly, its own
internal syntax and node-naming conventions to distinguish among
particular types. The TXT and SRV records are the notable examples.
Used freely, some of these approaches scale poorly, particularly when
the same RR can be present in the same leaf node, but with different
uses. An increasingly-popular approach, with excellent scaling
properties, uses an underscore-based name to a define place in the
DNS that is constrained to particular uses for particular RRs. This
means that a direct lookup produces only the desired records, at no
greater cost than a typical lookup.
In the case of TXT records, different uses have developed largely
without coordination. One side-effect is that there is no
consistently distinguishable internal syntax for the record; even
internal inspection might not be a reliable means of distinguishing
among the different uses. Underscore-based names therefore provide
an administrative way of separating TXT records that might have
different uses, but otherwise would have no syntactic markers for
distinguishing among them.
In the case of the SRV RR distinguishing among different types of use
was part of the design. [RFC2782] The SRV specification serves as a
template, defining an RR that may only be used for specific
applications when there is an additional specification. The template
definition includes reference to tables of names from which
underscore-names should be drawn. The set of <service> names is
defined in terms of other IANA tables, namely any table with symbolic
names. The other SRV naming field is <proto>, although its pool of
names is not explicitly defined.
3. Underscore DNS Registry Function
This specification defines a registry for DNS nodes names, used to
define scope of use for specific resource records (RR). A given name
defines a specific, constrained context for the use of such records.
This does not constrain the use of other resource records that are
not specified. The purpose of the registry is to avoid collisions
resulting from the use of the same underscore name, for different
applications.
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
Structurally, the registry is defined as a single, flat table of
names that begin with underscore. In some cases, such as for SRV, an
underscore name might be multi-part, as a sequence of names.
Semantically, this is a hierarchical model, thereby making a flat
registry unexpected.
The registry requires such hierarchies to be registered as a
combinatorial case analysis set, with each entry being a full
sequence of underscore names. Given a scheme that is actually
structured, this flat design is inelegant. However it has the
benefit of being extremely simple, with the added advantage of being
easier for readers to understand, as long as these cases are small
and few.
+----------------------------+
| NAME |
+----------------------------+
| _service1 |
| _service2._protoB |
| _service3._protoC |
| _service3._protoC |
| _service4._protoD._useX |
| _protoE._region._authority |
+----------------------------+
Example of Underscore Names
The flat registry design:
o provides significantly simpler administration than is needed for
hierarchical tables, simples, and
o is significantly simpler for readers to understand and is likely
to produce fewer programming or administration errors.
4. DNS Underscore Registry Definition
A registry entry MUST contain:
Name: Specifies a textual name for a scoped portion of the DNS.
The name will usually be taken from the specification cited in
the "Purpose" column and is intended for use in discussions
about the entry.
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
DNS Label(s): Specifies a sequence of one or more underscore
names that define a single name reservation.
Constraints: Specifies any restrictions on use of the name.
RR(s): Lists the RRs that are defined for use within this scope.
References Lists specifications that define the records and their
use under this Name.
Purpose: Specifies the particular purpose/use for specific
RR(s), defined for use within the scope of the registered
underscore name.
5. IANA Considerations
Per [RFC2434], IANA is requested to establish a DNS Underscore Name
Registry, for DNS node names that begin with the underscore character
(_) and have been specified in any published RFC, or are documented
by a specification published by another standards organization. The
contents of each entry are defined in Section 4.
+----------+--------------+--------+------+---------+---------------+
| NAME | DNS LABEL | CONSTR | RR(s | REFEREN | PURPOSE |
| | | AINTS | ) | CES | |
+----------+--------------+--------+------+---------+---------------+
| SRV TCP | _srv._tcp | | SRV | [RFC278 | SRV template |
| | | | | 2] | |
| SRV UDP | _srv._udp | | SRV | [RFC278 | SRV template |
| | | | | 2] | |
| LDAP SRV | _ldap._tcp | | SRV | [RFC278 | LDAP server |
| | | | | 2] | |
| SIP TCP | _sip._tcp | | NAPT | [RFC326 | Locating SIP |
| | | | R | 3], | Servers and |
| | | | | [RFC60 | UA |
| | | | | 11] | configuration |
| SIPS TCP | _sips._tcp | | NAPT | [RFC326 | Locating SIP |
| | | | R | 3], | Servers and |
| | | | | [RFC60 | UA |
| | | | | 11] | configuration |
| SIP UDP | _sip._udp | | SRV | [RFC326 | Locating SIP |
| | | | | 3], | servers and |
| | | | | [RFC60 | UA |
| | | | | 11] | configuration |
| SPF | _spf | | TXT | [RFC440 | Authorized IP |
| | | | | 8] | addresses for |
| | | | | | sending mail |
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
| DKIM | _domainkey | | TXT | [RFC487 | Public key |
| | | | | 1] | for verifying |
| | | | | | DKIM |
| | | | | | signature. |
| ADSP | _adsp._domai | | TXT | [RFC561 | Published |
| | nkey | | | 7] | DKIM usage |
| | | | | | practices |
| PKI LDAP | _PKIXREP._ld | | SRV | [RFC438 | LDAP PKI |
| | ap | | | 6] | Repository |
| PKI HTTP | _PKIXREP._ht | | SRV | [RFC438 | HTTP PKI |
| | tp | | | 6] | Repository |
| PKI OCSP | _PKIXREP._oc | | SRV | [RFC438 | OCSP PKI |
| | sp | | | 6] | Repository |
| VBR | _vouch | | TXT | [RFC551 | Vouch-by-refe |
| | | | | 8] | rerence domai |
| | | | | | nassertion |
| DDDS | --unknown!-- | | SRV | [RFC340 | Mapping DDDS |
| | | | | 4] | query to DNS |
| | | | | | records |
| SOAP | _soap-beep._ | | SRV | [RFC422 | SOAP over |
| BEEP | tcp | | | 7] | BEEP lookup, |
| | | | | | when no port |
| | | | | | specified |
| XMLRPC | _xmlrpc-beep | | SRV | [RFC352 | Resolve url |
| BEEP | ._tcp | | | 9] | for XML-RPC |
| | | | | | using BEEP |
| Diameter | _diameter._s | | SRV | [RFC358 | Diameter |
| SCTP | ctp | | | 8] | rendezvous |
| | | | | | over SCTP |
| Diameter | _diameter._t | | SRV | [RFC358 | Diameter |
| TCP | cp | | | 8] | rendezvous |
| | | | | | over TCP |
| Tunnel | _tunnel._tcp | | SRV | [RFC362 | Finding the |
| | | | | 0] | appropriate |
| | | | | | address for |
| | | | | | tunneling |
| | | | | | into a |
| | | | | | particular |
| | | | | | domain |
| SLP TCP | _slpda._tcp | | SRV | [RFC383 | Discovering |
| | | | | 2] | desired |
| | | | | | services in |
| | | | | | given DNS |
| | | | | | domains |
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
| SLP UDP | _slpda._udp | | SRV | [RFC383 | Discovering |
| | | | | 2] | desired |
| | | | | | services in |
| | | | | | given DNS |
| | | | | | domains |
| IM | _im | | SRV | [RFC386 | Instant |
| | | | | 1] | Messaging |
| | | | | | address |
| | | | | | resolution |
| Pres | _pres | | SRV | [RFC386 | Presence |
| | | | | 1] | address |
| | | | | | resolution |
| Msg | _mtqp._tcp | | SRV | [RFC388 | Assist in |
| Track | | | | 7] | determining |
| | | | | | the path that |
| | | | | | a particular |
| | | | | | message has |
| | | | | | taken through |
| | | | | | a messaging |
| | | | | | system |
| XMPP | _xmpp-client | | SRV | [RFC612 | XMPP client |
| Client | ._tcp | | | 0] | lookup of |
| | | | | | server |
| XMPP | _xmpp-server | | SRV | [RFC612 | XMPP |
| Server | ._tcp | | | 0] | server-server |
| | | | | | lookup |
| DDDS SRV | _??? | (unabl | SRV | [RFC395 | Map domain |
| | | eto | (and | 8] | name, |
| | | disce | NAPT | | application |
| | | rn | R?) | | service name, |
| | | deta | | | and |
| | | ils. | | | application |
| | | /dc | | | protocol |
| | | rocker | | | dynamically |
| | | ) | | | to target |
| | | | | | server and |
| | | | | | port |
| Kerberos | _kerberos._t | | SRV | [RFC412 | purpose |
| TCP | cp | | | 0] | |
| Kerberos | _kerberos._u | | SRV | [RFC412 | purpose |
| UDP | dp | | | 0] | |
| PKI LDAP | _pkixrep._ld | | SRV | [RFC438 | Enables |
| | ap | | | 6] | certificate-u |
| | | | | | sing systems |
| | | | | | to locate PK |
| | | | | | Irepositories |
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
| PKI HTTP | _pkixrep._ht | | SRV | [RFC438 | Enables |
| | tp | | | 6] | certificate-u |
| | | | | | sing systems |
| | | | | | to locate PK |
| | | | | | Irepositories |
| PKI OCSP | _pkixrep._oc | | SRV | [RFC438 | Enables |
| | sp | | | 6] | certificate-u |
| | | | | | sing systems |
| | | | | | to locate PK |
| | | | | | Irepositories |
| Cert | _certificate | | SRV | [RFC438 | Obtain |
| Store | s._tcp | | | 7] | certificates |
| | | | | | and |
| | | | | | certificate |
| | | | | | revocation |
| | | | | | lists (CRLs) |
| | | | | | from PKI |
| | | | | | repositories |
| Cert | _crls._tcp | | SRV | [RFC438 | Obtain |
| Revocati | | | | 7] | certificates |
| on Store | | | | | and |
| | | | | | certificate |
| | | | | | revocation |
| | | | | | lists (CRLs) |
| | | | | | from PKI |
| | | | | | repositories |
| PGP Key | pgpkeys._tcp | | SRV | [RFC438 | Obtain |
| Store | | | | 7] | certificates |
| | | | | | and |
| | | | | | certificate |
| | | | | | revocation |
| | | | | | lists (CRLs) |
| | | | | | from PKI |
| | | | | | repositories |
| MSRP | _msrp._tcp | | SRV | [RFC497 | purpose |
| Relay | | | | 6] | |
| Locator | | | | | |
| Mobile | _mip6._ipv6 | | SRV | [RFC502 | Bootstrap |
| IPv6 | | | | 6], | Mobile IPv6 |
| Bootstra | | | | [RFC55 | Home Agent |
| p | | | | 55] | information |
| | | | | | from |
| | | | | | non-topologic |
| | | | | | al informatio |
| | | | | | n |
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
| Digital | _dvbservdsc. | | SRV | [RFC532 | Discover |
| Video | _tcp | | | 8] | non-default |
| Broadcas | | | | | DVB entry |
| ting TCP | | | | | points |
| | | | | | addresses |
| Digital | _dvbservdsc. | | SRV | [RFC532 | Discover |
| Video | _udp | | | 8] | non-default |
| Broadcas | | | | | DVB entry |
| ting UDP | | | | | points |
| | | | | | addresses |
| CAPWAP | _capwap-cont | | rrs | [RFC541 | Discover the |
| AC | rol._udp | | | 5] | CAPWAP AC |
| | | | | | address(es) |
| IM SIP | _im._sip | | SRV | [RFC550 | For resolving |
| | | | | 9] | Instant |
| | | | | | Messaging and |
| | | | | | Presence |
| | | | | | services with |
| | | | | | SIP |
| Pres SIP | _pres._sip | | SRV | [RFC550 | For resolving |
| | | | | 9] | Instant |
| | | | | | Messaging and |
| | | | | | Presence |
| | | | | | services with |
| | | | | | SIP |
| IEEE | _mihis._tcp | | NAPT | [RFC567 | Discovering |
| 802.21 | | | R, | 9] | servers that |
| Mobility | | | SRV | | provide IEEE |
| TCP | | | | | 802.21-define |
| | | | | | dMobility |
| | | | | | Services |
| IEEE | _mihis._udp | | NAPT | [RFC567 | Discovering |
| 802.21 | | | R, | 9] | servers that |
| Mobility | | | SRV | | provide IEEE |
| UDP | | | | | 802.21-define |
| | | | | | dMobility |
| | | | | | Services |
| STUN | _stun._.tcp | | SRV | [RFC538 | Find a STUN |
| Client/S | | | | 9] | server |
| erver TC | | | | | |
| P | | | | | |
| STUN | _stun._.udp | | SRV | [RFC538 | Find a STUN |
| Client/S | | | | 9] | server |
| erver UD | | | | | |
| P | | | | | |
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
| STUN | _stuns._.tcp | | SRV | [RFC538 | Find a STUN |
| Client/S | | | | 9] | server |
| erver TL | | | | | |
| S | | | | | |
| TURN TCP | _turn._tcp | | SRV | [RFC576 | Control the |
| | | | | 6], | operation of |
| | | | | [RFC59 | a relay to |
| | | | | 28] | bypass NAT |
| TURN UDP | _turn._udp | | SRV | [RFC576 | Control the |
| | | | | 6], | operation of |
| | | | | [RFC59 | a relay to |
| | | | | 28] | bypass NAT |
| TURN TLS | _turns._tcp | | SRV | [RFC576 | Control the |
| | | | | 6], | operation of |
| | | | | [RFC59 | a relay to |
| | | | | 28] | bypass NAT |
| STUN NAT | _stun-behavi | | SRV | [RFC578 | Discover the |
| Behavior | or._tcp | | | 0] | presence and |
| Discover | | | | | current |
| yTCP | | | | | behavior of |
| | | | | | NATs and |
| | | | | | firewalls |
| | | | | | between the |
| | | | | | STUN client |
| | | | | | and the STUN |
| | | | | | server |
| STUN NAT | _stun-behavi | | SRV | [RFC578 | Discover the |
| Behavior | or._udp | | | 0] | presence and |
| Discover | | | | | current |
| yUDP | | | | | behavior of |
| | | | | | NATs and |
| | | | | | firewalls |
| | | | | | between the |
| | | | | | STUN client |
| | | | | | and the STUN |
| | | | | | server |
| STUN NAT | _stun-behavi | | SRV | [RFC578 | Discover the |
| Behavior | ors._tcp | | | 0] | presence and |
| Discover | | | | | current |
| yTLS | | | | | behavior of |
| | | | | | NATs and |
| | | | | | firewalls |
| | | | | | between the |
| | | | | | STUN client |
| | | | | | and the STUN |
| | | | | | server |
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
| Sieve | _sieve._tcp | | SRV | [RFC580 | Manage Sieve |
| Manageme | | | | 4] | scripts on a |
| nt | | | | | remote server |
| AFS VLDB | _afs3-vlserv | | SRV | [RFC586 | Locate |
| | er._udp | | | 4] | services for |
| | | | | | the AFS |
| | | | | | distributed |
| | | | | | file system |
| AFS PTS | _afs3-prserv | | SRV | [RFC586 | Locate |
| | er._udp | | | 4] | services for |
| | | | | | the AFS |
| | | | | | distributed |
| | | | | | file system |
| Mail MSA | _submission. | | SRV | [RFC618 | Locate email |
| Submissi | _tcp | | | 6] | services |
| on | | | | | |
| IMAP | _imap._tcp | | SRV | [RFC618 | Locate email |
| | | | | 6] | services |
| IMAP TLS | _imaps._tcp | | SRV | [RFC618 | Locate email |
| | | | | 6] | services |
| POP | _pop3._tcp | | SRV | [RFC618 | Locate email |
| | | | | 6] | services |
| POP TLS | _pop3s._tcp | | SRV | [RFC618 | Locate email |
| | | | | 6] | services |
+----------+--------------+--------+------+---------+---------------+
Table 1: DNS Underscore SCOPE Name Registry (with initial values)
6. Related Registries
Numerous specifications have defined their own, independent
registries for use of underscore names. It is likely that adoption
of the proposed, integrated registry should render these piecemeal
registries obsolete
Registries that are candidates for replacement include:
Instant Messaging SRV Protocol Label Registry
Public Key Infrastructure using X.509 (PKIX) Parameters
Presence SRV Protocol Label Registry
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
7. Security Considerations
This memo raises no security issues.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 2434,
October 1998.
8.2. References -- Informative
[RFC0974] Partridge, C., "Mail routing and the domain system",
RFC 974, January 1986.
[RFC2782] Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P., and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for
specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782,
February 2000.
[RFC2821] Klensin, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", RFC 2821,
April 2001.
[RFC3263] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP): Locating SIP Servers", RFC 3263,
June 2002.
[RFC3404] MMealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)
Part Four: The Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI)
Resolution Application", RFC 3404, October 2002.
[RFC3529] Harold, W., "Using Extensible Markup Language-Remote
Procedure Calling (XML-RPC) in Blocks Extensible Exchange
Protocol (BEEP)", RFC 3529, April 2003.
[RFC3588] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J.
Arkko, "Diameter Base Protocol", September 2003.
[RFC3620] New, D., "The TUNNEL Profile", RFC 3620, October 2003.
[RFC3832] Columbia University, Columbia University, Sun
Microsystems, IBM, and IBM, "Remote Service Discovery in
the Service Location Protocol (SLP) via DNS SRV",
July 2004.
[RFC3861] Peterson, J., "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
and Presence", RFC 3861, August 2004.
[RFC3887] "Message Tracking Query Protocol", September 2007.
[RFC3958] Daigle, L. and A. Newton, "Domain-Based Application
Service Location Using SRV RRs and the Dynamic Delegation
Discovery Service (DDDS)", RFC 3958, January 2005.
[RFC4120] USC-ISI, MIT, MIT, and MIT, "The Kerberos Network
Authentication Service (V5)", RFC 4120, July 2005.
[RFC4227] O'Tuathail, E. and M. Rose, "Using the Simple Object
Access Protocol (SOAP) in Blocks Extensible Exchange
Protocol (BEEP)", RFC 4227, January 2006.
[RFC4386] Boeyen, S. and P. Hallam-Baker, "Internet X.509 Public Key
Infrastructure: Repository Locator Service",
February 2006.
[RFC4387] Gutmann, P., Ed., "Internet X.509 Public Key
Infrastructure Operational Protocols: Certificate Store
Access via HTTP", RFC 4387, February 2006.
[RFC4408] Wong, M. and W. Schlitt, "Sender Policy Framework (SPF)
for Authorizing Use of Domains in E-Mail, Version 1",
RFC 4408, April 2006.
[RFC4871] Allman, E., Callas, J., Delany, M., Libbey, M., Fenton,
J., and M. Thomas, "DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM)
Signatures", RFC 4871, May 2007.
[RFC4976] Jennings, C., Mahy, R., and Roach, "Relay Extensions for
the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP)", RFC 4976,
September 2007.
[RFC5026] Giaretta, G., Ed., Kempf, J., and V. Devarapalli, Ed.,
"Mobile IPv6 Bootstrapping in Split Scenario", RFC 5026,
October 2007.
[RFC5328] Adolf, A. and P. MacAvock, "A Uniform Resource Name (URN)
Namespace for the Digital Video Broadcasting Project
(DVB)", RFC 5328, September 2008.
[RFC5389] Rosenberg, Mahy, Matthews, and Wing, "Session Traversal
Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 5389, October 2008.
[RFC5415] Calhoun, P., Ed., Montemurro, M., Ed., and D. Stanley,
Ed., "Control And Provisioning of Wireless Access Points
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
(CAPWAP) Protocol Specification", RFC 5415, March 2009.
[RFC5507] Faltstrom, P., Ed. and R. Austein, Ed., "", RFC 5507,
April 2009.
[RFC5509] Loreto, S., "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)
Registration of Instant Messaging and Presence DNS SRV RRs
for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 5509,
April 2009.
[RFC5518] Hoffman, P., Levine, J., and A. Hathcock, "Vouch By
Reference", RFC5 5518, April 2009.
[RFC5555] Soliman, H., Ed., "Mobile IPv6 Support for Dual Stack
Hosts and Routers", RFC 5555, June 2009.
[RFC5617] Sendmail, Inc., Cisco Systems, Inc., Yahoo! Inc., and
Taughannock Networks, "DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM)
Author Domain Signing Practices (ADSP)", August 2009.
[RFC5679] Bajko, G., "Locating IEEE 802.21 Mobility Services Using
DNS", RFC 5679, December 2009.
[RFC5766] Mahy, R., Matthews, P., and J. Rosenberg, "Traversal Using
Relays around NAT (TURN): Relay Extensions to Session
Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 5766, April 2010.
[RFC5780] MacDonald, D. and B. Lowekamp, "NAT Behavior Discovery
Using Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)",
RFC 5780, May 2010.
[RFC5804] Melnikov, A., Ed. and T. Martin, "A Protocol for Remotely
Managing Sieve Scripts", RFC 5804, July 2010.
[RFC5864] Allbery, R., "NS SRV Resource Records for AFS", RFC 5864,
April 2010.
[RFC5928] Petit-Huguenin, M., "Traversal Using Relays around NAT
(TURN) Resolution Mechanism", RFC 5928, August 2010.
[RFC6011] Lawrence, S., Ed. and J. Elwell, "Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP) User Agent Configuration", RFC 6011,
October 2010.
[RFC6120] Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence
Protocol (XMPP): Core", RFC 6120, March 2011.
[RFC6186] Daboo, C., "Use of SRV Records for Locating Email
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft DNS Scoped Data Through Attribute Leaves April 2011
Submission/Access Services", RFC 6186, March 2011.
URIs
[1] <mailto:dnsop@lists.uoregon.edu>
[2] <http://ietf.org/html.charters/dnsop-charter.html>
Appendix A. Acknowledgements
Thanks go to Bill Fenner, Tony Hansen, Peter Koch, Olaf Kolkman, and
Andrew Sullivan for diligent review of the earlier drafts.
Author's Address
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
675 Spruce Dr.
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
USA
Phone: +1.408.246.8253
Email: dcrocker@bbiw.net
URI: http://bbiw.net/
Crocker Expires October 15, 2011 [Page 16]
