[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02

   DNSIND Working Group                                         Paul Vixie
   INTERNET-DRAFT                                        Vixie Enterprises
   <draft-ietf-dnsind-edns-02.txt>                             March, 1998
   
   
                           Extensions to DNS (EDNS)
   
   
   Status of this Memo
   
      This document is an Internet-Draft.  Internet-Drafts are working
      documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas,
      and its working groups.  Note that other groups may also distribute
      working documents as Internet-Drafts.
   
      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.''
   
      To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the
      ``1id-abstracts.txt'' listing contained in the Internet-Drafts Shadow
      Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), ftp.nordu.net (North Europe),
      ftp.nis.garr.it (South Europe), munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim),
      ds.internic.net (US East Coast), or ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast).
   
   
   Abstract
   
      The Domain Name System's wire protocol includes a number of fixed
      fields whose range has been or soon will be exhausted, does not allow
      clients to advertise their capabilities to servers, and does not
      support the use of multiple questions per request.  This document
      describes backward compatible mechanisms for allowing the protocol to
      grow.
   
   1 - Rationale and Scope
   
   1.1. DNS (see [RFC1035]) specifies a Message Format and within such
   messages there are standard formats for encoding options, errors, and
   name compression.  The maximum allowable size of a DNS Message is fixed.
   Many of DNS's protocol limits are too small for uses which are or which
   are desired to become common.  There is no way for clients to advertise
   their capabilities to servers, and it is not possible to ask multiple
   questions in a single request.
   
   
   
   Expires September 1998                                          [Page 1]
   

   INTERNET-DRAFT                    EDNS                        March 1998
   
   
   1.2. Existing clients will not know how to interpret the protocol
   extensions detailed here.  In practice, these clients will be upgraded
   when they have need of a new feature, and only new features will make
   use of the extensions.  We must however take account of client behaviour
   in the face of extra fields, and design a fallback scheme for
   interoperability with these clients.
   
   2 - Affected Protocol Elements
   
   2.1. The DNS Message Header's (see [RFC1035 4.1.1]) second full 16-bit
   word is divided into a 4-bit OPCODE, a 4-bit RCODE, and a number of
   1-bit flags.  The original reserved Z bits have been allocated to
   various purposes, and most of the RCODE values are now in use.  More
   types and more possible RCODEs are needed.
   
   2.2. The first two bits of a wire format domain label are used to denote
   the type of the label.  [RFC1035 4.1.4] allocates two of the four
   possible types and reserves the other two.  Proposals for use of the
   remaining types far outnumber those available.  More label types are
   needed.
   
   2.3. Compression pointers are 14 bits in size and are relative to the
   start of the DNS Message, which can be 64KB in length.  14 bits restrict
   pointers to the first 16KB of the message, which makes labels introduced
   in the last 48KB of the message unreachable by compression pointers.  A
   longer pointer format is needed.
   
   2.4. DNS Messages are limited to 512 octets in size when sent over UDP.
   While the minimum maximum reassembly buffer size is still 512 bytes,
   most of the hosts now connected to the Internet are able to reassemble
   larger datagrams.  Some mechanism must be created to allow requestors to
   advertise larger buffer sizes to responders.
   
   2.5. DNS Messages are limited to 65535 octets in size when sent over
   TCP.  This acts as an effective maximum on RRset size, since multiple
   TCP messages are only possible in the case of zone transfers.  Some
   mechanism must be created to allow normal DNS responses (other than zone
   transfers) to span multiple DNS Messages when TCP is used.
   
   2.6. Multiple queries in a question section have not been supported in
   DNS due the applicability of some DNS Message Header flags (such as AA)
   and of the RCODE field only to a single QNAME, QTYPE, and QCLASS.
   Multiple questions per request are desirable, and some way of asking
   them must be made available.
   
   
   
   
   Expires September 1998                                          [Page 2]
   

   INTERNET-DRAFT                    EDNS                        March 1998
   
   
   3 - Extended Label Types
   
   3.1. The ``1 0'' label type will now indicate an extended label type,
   whose value is encoded in the lower six bits of the first octet of a
   label.  All subsequently developed label types should be encoded using
   an extended label type.
   
   3.2. The ``0 0 0 0 0 0'' extended label type will indicate an extended
   compression pointer, such that the following two octets comprise a
   16-bit compression pointer in network byte order.  Like the normal
   compression pointer, this pointer is relative to the start of the DNS
   Message.
   
   3.3. The ``0 0 0 0 0 1'' extended label type will indicate a counted bit
   string label with interior longest-match query matching semantics as
   described in [CRAW98].
   
   3.5. The ``1 1 1 1 1 1'' extended label type will be reserved for future
   expansion of the extended label type code space.
   
   4 - OPT pseudo-RR
   
   4.1. The OPT pseudo-RR can be added to the additional data section of
   either a request or a response.  An OPT is called a pseudo-RR because it
   pertains to a particular transport level message and not to any actual
   DNS data.  OPT RRs shall never be cached, forwarded, or stored in or
   loaded from master files.
   
   4.2. An OPT RR has a fixed part and a variable set of options expressed
   as {attribute, value} pairs.  The fixed part holds some DNS meta data
   and also a small collection of new protocol elements which we expect to
   be so popular that it would be a waste of wire space to encode them as
   {attribute, value} pairs.
   
   4.3. The fixed part of an OPT RR is structured as follows:
   
   Field Name   Field Type     Description
   -----------------------------------------------------
   NAME         domain name    empty (root domain)
   TYPE         u_int16_t      OPT (XXX IANA)
   CLASS        u_int16_t      sender's UDP buffer size
   TTL          u_int32_t      extended RCODE and flags
   RDLEN        u_int16_t      describes RDATA
   RDATA        octet stream   {attribute,value} pairs
   
   
   
   
   Expires September 1998                                          [Page 3]
   

   INTERNET-DRAFT                    EDNS                        March 1998
   
   
   4.4. The variable part of an OPT RR is encoded in its RDATA and is
   structured as zero or more of the following:
   
                    +0 (MSB)                            +1 (LSB)
         +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
      0: |                          OPTION-CODE                          |
         +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
      2: |                         OPTION-LENGTH                         |
         +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
      4: |                                                               |
         /                          OPTION-DATA                          /
         /                                                               /
         +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
   
   
   OPTION-CODE    Assigned by the IANA.  Value 65535 is reserved for future
                  expansion.
   
   OPTION-LENGTH  Size (in octets) of OPTION-DATA.
   
   OPTION-DATA    Varies per OPTION-CODE.
   
   4.5. The sender's UDP buffer size is the number of octets of the largest
   UDP payload that can be reassembled and delivered in the sender's
   network stack.  Note that path MTU, with or without fragmentation, may
   be smaller than this.  Also note that a 512-octet UDP payload requires a
   576-octet IP reassembly buffer.  Choosing 1436 on an Ethernet connected
   requestor would be reasonable.  The consequence of choosing too large a
   value may be an ICMP message from an intermediate gateway, or even a
   silent drop of the response message.  Requestors are advised to retry in
   such cases.  Both requestors and responders are advised to take account
   of the path's MTU when considering message sizes.
   
   4.6. The extended RCODE and flags are structured as follows:
   
                    +0 (MSB)                            +1 (LSB)
         +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
      0: |         EXTENDED-RCODE        |            VERSION            |
         +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
      2: |MD |FM |RRD|                          Z                        |
         +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
   
   
   EXTENDED-RCODE  Forms upper 8 bits of extended 12-bit RCODE.
                   (Meaningless in requests.)
   
   
   
   Expires September 1998                                          [Page 4]
   

   INTERNET-DRAFT                    EDNS                        March 1998
   
   
   VERSION         Indicates the implementation level of whoever sets it.
                   Full conformance with the draft standard version of this
                   specification is version ``0.''  Note that both
                   requestors and responders should set this to the highest
                   level they implement, that responders should send back
                   RCODE=BADVERS (XXX IANA) and that requestors should be
                   prepared to probe using lower version numbers if they
                   receive an RCODE=BADVERS.
   
   Z               Set to zero by senders and ignored by receivers, unless
                   modified in a subsequent specification.
   
   MD              ``More data'' flag.  Valid only in TCP streams where
                   message ordering and reliability are guaranteed.  This
                   flag indicates that the current message is not the
                   complete request or response, and should be aggregated
                   with the following message(s) before being considered
                   complete.  Such messages are called ``segmented.''  It
                   is an error for the RCODE (including the EXTENDED-
                   RCODE), AA flag, or DNS Message ID to differ among
                   segments of a segmented message.  It is an error for TC
                   to be set on any message of a segmented message.  Any
                   given RR must fit completely within a message, and all
                   messages will both begin and end on RR boundaries.
   
   FM              ``First match'' flag.  Notable only when multiple
                   questions are present.  If set in a request, questions
                   will be processed in wire order and the first question
                   whose answer would be NOERROR AND ANCOUNT>0 is treated
                   as if it were the only question in the query message.
                   Otherwise, questions can be processed in any order and
                   all possible answer records will be included in the
                   response.  FM should be set to zero in responses and
                   ignored by requestors.
   
   RRD             ``Recursion really desired'' flag.  Notable only when a
                   request is processed by an intermediate name server
                   (``forwarder'') who is not authoritative for the zone
                   containing QNAME, and where QTYPE=ANY or QDCOUNT>1.  If
                   set in a request, the intermediate name server can only
                   answer using unexpired cached answers (either positive
                   or negative) which were atomically acquired using the
                   same QTYPE or set of QTYPEs present in the current
                   question and where all such answers had the same TTL
                   when first cached.
   
   
   
   Expires September 1998                                          [Page 5]
   

   INTERNET-DRAFT                    EDNS                        March 1998
   
   
   5 - Multiple Questions for QUERY
   
   5.1. If QDCOUNT>1, multiple questions are present.  All questions must
   be for the same QNAME and QCLASS; only the QTYPE is allowed to vary.  It
   is an error for QDCOUNT>1 and any QTYPE=ANY or QCLASS=ANY.
   
   5.2. RCODE and AA apply to all RRs in the answer section having the
   QNAME that is shared by all questions in the question section.  AA
   applies to all matching answers, and will not be set unless the exact
   original request was processed by an authoritative server and the
   response forwarded in its entirety if at all, or unless iterative
   requests are used as described in [5.4] below.
   
   5.3. If a multiple question request is processed by an intermediate
   server and the authority server does not support multiple questions, the
   intermediate server must generate an answer iteratively by making
   multiple requests of the authority server.  In this case, AA must never
   be set in the final answer due to lack of atomicity of the contributing
   authoritative responses.
   
   5.4. If iteratively processing a multiple question request using an
   authority server which can only process single question requests, if any
   contributing request generates a SERVFAIL response, then the final
   response's RCODE should be SERVFAIL.
   
   6 - Transport Considerations
   
   6.1. The presence of an OPT pseudo-RR or any new label type, or
   QDCOUNT>1 in a request should be taken as an indication that the
   requestor fully implements this specification and can correctly
   understand any response that conforms to this specification.  If a new
   label type or QDCOUNT>1 is used in a message that does not have an OPT
   RR, a VERSION of ``0'' shall be imputed.
   
   6.2. Lack of use of these features in a request must be taken as an
   indication that the requestor does not implement any part of this
   specification and that the responder may make no use of any protocol
   extension described here in its response.
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   Expires September 1998                                          [Page 6]
   

   INTERNET-DRAFT                    EDNS                        March 1998
   
   
   6.3. Responders who do not understand these protocol extensions are
   expected to send a respose with RCODE NOTIMPL, FORMERR, or SERVFAIL.
   Therefore use of extensions should be ``probed'' such that a responder
   who isn't known to support them be allowed a retry with no extensions if
   it responds with one of the above mentioned RCODEs.  If a responder's
   capability is cached by requestors, a new probe should be sent
   periodically to test for upgrades to responder capability.
   
   7 - Security Considerations
   
   Requestor-side specification of the maximum buffer size may open a new
   DNS denial of service attack if responders can be made to send messages
   which are too large for intermediate gateways to forward, thus leading
   to potential ICMP storms between gateways and responders.
   
   8 - Acknowledgements
   
   Paul Mockapetris, Mark Andrews, Robert Elz, Don Lewis, Bob Halley, and
   Donald Eastlake were each instrumental in creating this specification.
   
   9 - References
   
   [RFC1035]  P. Mockapetris, ``Domain Names - Implementation and
              Specification,'' RFC 1035, USC/Information Sciences
              Institute, November 1987.
   
   [CRAW98]   M. Crawford, ``Binary Labels in the Domain Name System,''
              Draft draft-ietf-dnsind-binary-labels-XX, IETF DNSIND, March
              1998.
   
   10 - Author's Address
   
   
      Paul Vixie
         Vixie Enterprises
         950 Charter Street
         Redwood City, CA 94063
         +1 650 779 7001
         <paul@vix.com>
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   Expires September 1998                                          [Page 7]
   

Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.107, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/