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

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05

Network Working Group                                      S. Bortzmeyer
Internet-Draft                                                     AFNIC
Intended status: Standards Track                          April 21, 2016
Expires: October 23, 2016


     Using DNAME in the root for the delegation of special-use TLDs
                     draft-bortzmeyer-dname-root-01

Abstract

   This documents asks IANA to add DNAME records in the DNS root for
   TLDs which are in the Special-Use Domain Names registry, in order to
   ensure they receive an appropriate reply (NXDOMAIN) and that the root
   is not too bothered by them.

   REMOVE BEFORE PUBLICATION: there is no obvious place to discuss this
   document.  May be the IETF DNSOP (DNS Operations) group, through its
   mailing list (the author reads it).  Or may AS112 operators mailing
   lists?  The source of the document, as well as a list of open issues,
   is currently kept at Github [1].

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 23, 2016.

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



Bortzmeyer              Expires October 23, 2016                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft                DNAME in root                   April 2016


   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 and background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Requirements Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Benefits  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Possible issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     8.3.  URIs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5

1.  Introduction and background

   The DNS root receives a lot of requests for TLDs which do not exist.
   See for instance [fujiwara-root-traffic] or [icann-l-root-stats] or
   [ssac-045].  In the spirit of [RFC7534], it would be good if they
   could be redirected to a sink such as AS112, to save root's
   resources.

   Some of these names, and specially one of the biggest offenders,
   .local ([RFC6762]), are registered in the Special-Use Domain Names
   registry [2] of [RFC6761].  They are obvious candidates for a
   delegation to the sink.

   It is proposed to use the new AS112, the one described by [RFC7535]
   to implement this sink.

   TODO: results of the discussion with AS112 people

1.1.  Requirements Terminology

   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].






Bortzmeyer              Expires October 23, 2016                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft                DNAME in root                   April 2016


2.  Rules

   Every TLD ([RFC7719], section 2) which is in the Special-Use Domain
   Names registry [3] ([RFC6761]) SHOULD be delegated by IANA through a
   DNAME to empty.as112.arpa as described in [RFC7535] if and only if
   the registration of this TLD say that resolvers should not or must
   not look them up in the DNS.

   It is important to notice that this document does not define a policy
   to decide if a TLD should be "delegated" or not.  Instead, it relies
   on the existing Special-Use Domain Names registry and its rules.

   RFC-EDITOR: remove before publication.  As of today, with these
   rules, .local ([RFC6762]) or .onion ([RFC7686]) would be delegated
   but not .example (its registration in [RFC6761] does not define
   special handling for resolvers) or .home or .belkin (this last one
   generates a huge traffic at the root but is not in the Special-Use
   Domain Names registry).

3.  Benefits

   The main benefit is less load on the root and a better efficiency of
   the caches, therefore helping the entire DNS ecosystem.

4.  Possible issues

   Of course, the solution described in this document requires a good
   support of DNAME by the resolvers.  Appendix A of [RFC7535] describes
   an experiment which was run in 2013 and which shows that, indeed, we
   can rely on DNAME (quoting the authors: "We conclude that there is no
   evidence of a consistent failure on the part of deployed DNS
   resolvers to correctly resolve a DNAME construct.").

   Regarding DNSSEC, do note the future DNAMEs in the root will be
   signed, but the target, empty.as112.arpa, is not.  See George
   Michaelson's message [4].  So, it will not be possible to validate
   the answers.  Not a problem since these requests should never have
   been sent to the root, anyway.

5.  IANA Considerations

   IANA is requested (TODO what is the appropriate wording?) to add a
   DNAME in the root for every TLD which fits the rules of Section 2.

   RFC-EDITOR: remove before publication.  There is currently no DNAME
   in the root.  It is expected that the creation of the first one will
   require a top-down, multi-stakeholder, long and complicated process
   with a lot of meetings, reports by consultants and design teams.



Bortzmeyer              Expires October 23, 2016                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft                DNAME in root                   April 2016


6.  Security Considerations

   The requests for the TLD in the Special-Use Domain Names registry are
   typically NOT supposed to leak to the authoritative public name
   servers such as the ones of the root.  If they do, it means a
   misconfiguration somewhere.  The leak is independant on whether the
   name is delegated to AS112 or not.  See section 8 of [RFC7534] for an
   analysis.  Some people believe there are added risks, because the
   queries will be seen by AS112 servers which, unlike the root, are
   managed by many "random people".

7.  Acknowledgments

   Thanks to Paul Hoffman to say that it may be a good idea and for Ted
   Lemon to give the final impulse, with his [I-D.tldr-sutld-ps].

8.  References

8.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC6761]  Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "Special-Use Domain Names",
              RFC 6761, DOI 10.17487/RFC6761, February 2013,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6761>.

   [RFC7534]  Abley, J. and W. Sotomayor, "AS112 Nameserver Operations",
              RFC 7534, DOI 10.17487/RFC7534, May 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7534>.

   [RFC7535]  Abley, J., Dickson, B., Kumari, W., and G. Michaelson,
              "AS112 Redirection Using DNAME", RFC 7535,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7535, May 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7535>.

   [RFC7719]  Hoffman, P., Sullivan, A., and K. Fujiwara, "DNS
              Terminology", RFC 7719, DOI 10.17487/RFC7719, December
              2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7719>.

8.2.  Informative References

   [RFC6762]  Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "Multicast DNS", RFC 6762,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6762, February 2013,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6762>.




Bortzmeyer              Expires October 23, 2016                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft                DNAME in root                   April 2016


   [RFC7686]  Appelbaum, J. and A. Muffett, "The ".onion" Special-Use
              Domain Name", RFC 7686, DOI 10.17487/RFC7686, October
              2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7686>.

   [I-D.tldr-sutld-ps]
              Lemon, T. and R. Droms, "Special Use TLD Problem
              Statement", draft-tldr-sutld-ps-00 (work in progress),
              April 2016.

   [fujiwara-root-traffic]
              Fujiwara, K., "2014 Root DITL Data analysis and TLD
              popularity analysis (OARC workshop)", October 2014,
              <https://indico.dns-
              oarc.net/event/20/session/2/contribution/2/material/
              slides/4.pdf>.

   [icann-l-root-stats]
              "QTYPE values for most popular TLDs (ICANN's L-root server
              public statistics)", April 2016,
              <http://stats.dns.icann.org/hedgehog/hedgehog.html>.

   [ssac-045]
              ICANN, , "SAC 045 - Invalid Top Level Domain Queries at
              the Root Level of the Domain Name System", November 2010,
              <https://www.icann.org/en/groups/ssac/documents/sac-
              045-en.pdf>.

8.3.  URIs

   [1] https://github.com/bortzmeyer/ietf-dname-root

   [2] http://www.iana.org/assignments/special-use-domain-names/special-
       use-domain-names.xml

   [3] http://www.iana.org/assignments/special-use-domain-names/special-
       use-domain-names.xml

   [4] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/
       JsPNz66aQE3-r3toawCV_ajoCNo

Author's Address










Bortzmeyer              Expires October 23, 2016                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft                DNAME in root                   April 2016


   Stephane Bortzmeyer
   AFNIC
   1, rue Stephenson
   Montigny-le-Bretonneux  78180
   France

   Phone: +33 1 39 30 83 46
   Email: bortzmeyer+ietf@nic.fr
   URI:   http://www.afnic.fr/










































Bortzmeyer              Expires October 23, 2016                [Page 6]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129c, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/