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

Versions: 00 01

Document: draft-sekar-dns-ul-01.txt                      Stuart Cheshire
Internet-Draft                                             Marc Krochmal
Category: Standards Track                           Apple Computer, Inc.
Expires 10th February 2007                                   Kiren Sekar
                                                         Sharpcast, Inc.
                                                        10th August 2006

                       Dynamic DNS Update Leases


Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
   For the purposes of this document, the term "BCP 79" refers
   exclusively to RFC 3979, "Intellectual Property Rights in IETF
   Technology", published March 2005.

   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-

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at


   This document proposes a method of extending Dynamic DNS Update to
   contain an update lease life, allowing a server to garbage collect
   stale resource records.

Expires 10th February 2007       Sekar, et al.                  [Page 1]

Internet Draft           Dynamic DNS Update Leases      10th August 2006

1. Introduction

   Dynamic DNS Update [RFC 2136] allows for a mapping from a persistent
   hostname to a dynamic IP address. This capability is particularly
   beneficial to mobile hosts, whose IP address may frequently change
   with location. However, the mobile nature of such hosts often means
   that dynamically updated resource records are often not properly
   deleted. Consider, for instance, a mobile user who publishes address
   records via dynamic update. If this user unplugs the Ethernet cable
   from their laptop, the address record containing stale information
   will remain on the server indefinitely.  "DNS Scavenging" attempts to
   address this issue by configuring clients and servers with a preset
   refresh interval, however, this approach does not extend to
   zero-configuration environments in which the client and server are
   not under the same administration. An extension to Dynamic Update is
   thus required to tell the server to automatically delete resource
   records if they are not refreshed after a period of time.

   Note that overloading the resource record TTL [RFC 1035] is not
   appropriate for purposes of garbage collection. Data that is
   susceptible to frequent change or invalidation, thus requiring a
   garbage collection mechanism, needs a relatively short resource
   record TTL to avoid polluting intermediate DNS caches with stale
   data. Using this TTL, short enough to minimize stale cached data,
   as a garbage collection lease life would result in an unacceptable
   amount of network traffic due to refreshes (see section 6 "Refresh

2. Conventions and Terminology Used in this Document

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   document are to be interpreted as described in "Key words for use in
   RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels" [RFC 2119].

3. Mechanisms

   Dynamic DNS Update Leases is implemented using the standard Dynamic
   Update message format [RFC 2136] in conjunction with an ENDS0 OPT
   pseudo-RR [RFC 2671] with a new OPT and RDATA format proposed here.
   Encoding the Update Lease Life in an OPT RR requires minimal
   modification to a name server's front-end, and will cause servers
   that do not implement this extension to automatically return a
   descriptive error (NOTIMPL).

4. New Assigned Numbers

           UPDATE-LEASE 2

Expires 10th February 2007       Sekar, et al.                  [Page 2]

Internet Draft           Dynamic DNS Update Leases      10th August 2006

5. Update Message Format

   Dynamic DNS Update Leases Requests and Responses are formatted as per
   [RFC 2136], with the addition of a single OPT-RR as the last record
   in the Additional section. Note that if a TSIG resource record is
   to be added to authenticate the update [RFC 2845], the OPT-RR should
   occur BEFORE the TSIG RR, allowing the message digest in the TSIG to
   contain the OPT-RR.

   The OPT-RR is formatted as follows:

   Field Name       Field Type        Description
   NAME             domain name       empty (root domain)
   TYPE             u_int16_t         OPT
   CLASS            u_int16_t         0
   TTL              u_int32_t         0
   RDLEN            u_int16_t         describes RDATA
   RDATA            octet stream      (see below)

   RDATA Format:

   Field Name        Field Type       Description
   OPTION-CODE       u_int16_t        UPDATE-LEASE (2)
   OPTION-LENGTH     u_int16_t        sizeof(int32_t)
   LEASE             int32_t          desired lease (request) or granted
                                      lease (response), in seconds

   Update Requests contain, in the LEASE field of the OPT RDATA, a
   signed 32-bit integer indicating the lease life, in seconds, desired
   by the client. In Update Responses, this field contains the actual
   lease granted by the server. Note that the lease granted by the
   server may be less than, greater than, or equal to the value
   requested by the client. To reduce network and server load, a
   minimum lease of 30 minutes (1800 seconds) is RECOMMENDED. Note that
   leases are expected to be sufficiently long as to make timer
   discrepancies  (due to transmission latency, etc.) between a client
   and server negligible. Clients that expect the updated records to be
   relatively static MAY request appropriately longer leases. Servers
   MAY grant relatively longer or shorter leases to reduce network
   traffic due to refreshes, or reduce stale data, respectively.

   The Update Lease indicated in the OPT-RR applies to all resource
   records in the Update section.

Expires 10th February 2007       Sekar, et al.                  [Page 3]

Internet Draft           Dynamic DNS Update Leases      10th August 2006

6. Refresh Messages

   Resource records not to be deleted by the server MUST be refreshed by
   the client before the lease elapses. Clients SHOULD refresh resource
   records after 75% of the original lease has elapsed. If the client
   uses UDP and does not receive a response from the server, the client
   SHOULD re-try after 2 seconds. The client SHOULD continue to re-try,
   doubling the length of time between each re-try, or re-try using TCP.

6.1 Coalescing Refresh Messages

   If the client has sent multiple updates to a single server, the
   client MAY include refreshes for all valid updates to that server in
   a single message. This effectively places all records for a client
   on the same expiration schedule, reducing network traffic due to
   refreshes. In doing so, the client includes in the refresh message
   all existing updates to the server, including those not yet close to
   expiration, so long as at least one resource record in the message
   has elapsed at least 75% of its original lease. If the client uses
   UDP, the client MUST NOT coalesce refresh messages if doing so would
   cause truncation of the message; in this case, multiple messages or
   TCP should be used.

6.2 Refresh Message Format

   Refresh messages are formatted like Dynamic Update Leases Requests
   and Responses (see Section 5 "Update Message Format"). The resource
   records to be refreshed are contained in the Update section. These
   same resource records are repeated in the Prerequisite section, as
   an "RRSet exists (value dependent)" prerequisite as per [RFC 2136]
   section 2.4.  An OPT-RR is the last resource record in the Additional
   section (except for a TSIG record, which, if required, follows the
   OPT-RR). The OPT-RR contains the desired new lease on Requests, and
   the actual granted lease on Responses. The Update Lease indicated in
   the OPT-RR applies to all resource records in the Update section.

6.3 Server Behavior

   Upon receiving a valid Refresh Request, the server MUST send an
   acknowledgment. This acknowledgment is identical to the Update
   Response format described in section 5 "Update Message Format",
   and contains the new lease of the resource records being refreshed.
   If no records in the Refresh Request have completed 75% of their
   leases, the server SHOULD NOT refresh the updates; the response
   should contain the smallest remaining (unrefreshed) lease of all
   records in the refresh message. The server MUST NOT increment the
   SOA serial number of a zone as the result of a refresh.

Expires 10th February 2007       Sekar, et al.                  [Page 4]

Internet Draft           Dynamic DNS Update Leases      10th August 2006

7. Garbage Collection

   If the Update Lease of a resource record elapses without being
   refreshed, the server MUST NOT return the expired record in answers
   to queries. The server MAY delete the record from its database.

8. Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).

   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
   contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
   retain all their rights. For the purposes of this document,
   the term "BCP 78" refers exclusively to RFC 3978, "IETF Rights
   in Contributions", published March 2005.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on

9. IANA Considerations

   The EDNS0 OPTION CODE 2 has already been assigned for this DNS
   extension. No additional IANA services are required by this document.

10. Acknowledgments

   The concepts described in this document have been explored, developed
   and implemented with help from Roger Pantos and Chris Sharp.

11. Normative References

   [RFC 1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Implementation and
              Specifications", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.

   [RFC 2119] RFC 2119 - Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels

   [RFC 2136] Vixie, P., et al., "Dynamic Updates in the Domain Name
              System (DNS UPDATE)", RFC 2136, April 1997.

   [RFC 2671] Vixie, P., "Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0)",
              RFC 2671, August 1999.

Expires 10th February 2007       Sekar, et al.                  [Page 5]

Internet Draft           Dynamic DNS Update Leases      10th August 2006

12. Informative References

   [RFC 2845] Vixie, P., et al., "Secret Key Transaction Authentication
              for DNS (TSIG)", RFC 2845, May 2000.

13. Authors' Addresses

   Stuart Cheshire
   Apple Computer, Inc.
   1 Infinite Loop
   California 95014

   Phone: +1 408 974 3207
   EMail: rfc [at] stuartcheshire [dot] org

   Marc Krochmal
   Apple Computer, Inc.
   1 Infinite Loop
   California 95014

   Phone: +1 408 974 4368
   EMail: marc [at] apple [dot] com

   Kiren Sekar
   Sharpcast, Inc.
   250 Cambridge Ave, Suite 101
   Palo Alto
   California 94306

   Phone: +1 650 323 1960
   EMail: ksekar [at] sharpcast [dot] com

Expires 10th February 2007       Sekar, et al.                  [Page 6]

Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.120, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/