draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-dname-04.txt   draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-dname-05.txt 
Network Working Group J. Abley Network Working Group J. Abley
Internet-Draft Dyn, Inc. Internet-Draft Dyn, Inc.
Intended status: Informational B. Dickson Intended status: Informational B. Dickson
Expires: December 29, 2014 Verisign Labs Expires: May 23, 2015 Twitter, Inc.
W. Kumari W. Kumari
Google Google
G. Michaelson G. Michaelson
APNIC APNIC
June 27, 2014 November 19, 2014
AS112 Redirection using DNAME AS112 Redirection using DNAME
draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-dname-04 draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-dname-05
Abstract Abstract
Many sites connected to the Internet make use of IPv4 addresses that AS112 provides a mechanism for handling reverse lookups on IP
are not globally unique. Examples are the addresses designated in addresses that are not unique (e.g., RFC 1918 addresses). This
RFC 1918 for private use within individual sites.
Devices in such environments may occasionally originate Domain Name
System (DNS) queries (so-called "reverse lookups") corresponding to
those private-use addresses. Since the addresses concerned have only
local significance, it is good practice for site administrators to
ensure that such queries are answered locally. However, it is not
uncommon for such queries to follow the normal delegation path in the
public DNS instead of being answered within the site.
It is not possible for public DNS servers to give useful answers to
such queries. In addition, due to the wide deployment of private-use
addresses and the continuing growth of the Internet, the volume of
such queries is large and growing. The AS112 project aims to provide
a distributed sink for such queries in order to reduce the load on
the IN-ADDR.ARPA authoritative servers. The AS112 project is named
after the Autonomous System Number (ASN) that was assigned to it.
The AS112 project does not accommodate the addition and removal of
DNS zones elegantly. Since additional zones of definitively local
significance are known to exist, this presents a problem. This
document describes modifications to the deployment and use of AS112 document describes modifications to the deployment and use of AS112
infrastructure that will allow zones to be added and dropped much infrastructure that will allow zones to be added and dropped much
more easily. more easily, using DNAME resource records.
Status of this Memo This approach makes it possible for any DNS zone administrator to
sink traffic relating to parts of the global DNS namespace under
their control to the AS112 infrastructure without coordination with
the operators of AS112 infrastructure.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 29, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on May 23, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Design Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2. Design Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. AS112 Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. AS112 Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Extensions to Support DNAME Redirection . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1. Extensions to Support DNAME Redirection . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Redirection of Query Traffic to AS112 Servers . . . . . . 6 3.2. Redirection of Query Traffic to AS112 Servers . . . . . . 5
4. Continuity of AS112 Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4. Continuity of AS112 Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Candidate Zones for AS112 Redirection . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5. Candidate Zones for AS112 Redirection . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. DNAME Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. DNAME Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. IAB Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7. IAB Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8.1. Address Assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8.1. Address Assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8.2. Hosting of AS112.ARPA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 8.2. Hosting of AS112.ARPA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8.3. Delegation of AS112.ARPA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8.3. Delegation of AS112.ARPA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Appendix A. Assessing Support for DNAME in the Real World . . . . 18 Appendix A. Assessing Support for DNAME in the Real World . . . 12
A.1. Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 A.1. Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
A.2. Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 A.2. Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Appendix B. Editorial Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Appendix B. Editorial Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
B.1. Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 B.1. Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The AS112 project is described in detail in [RFC6304bis]. Many sites connected to the Internet make use of IPv4 addresses that
are not globally unique. Examples are the addresses designated in
[RFC1918] for private use within individual sites.
Devices in such environments may occasionally originate Domain Name
System (DNS) queries (so-called "reverse lookups") corresponding to
those private-use addresses. Since the addresses concerned have only
local significance, it is good practice for site administrators to
ensure that such queries are answered locally. However, it is not
uncommon for such queries to follow the normal delegation path in the
public DNS instead of being answered within the site.
It is not possible for public DNS servers to give useful answers to
such queries. In addition, due to the wide deployment of private-use
addresses and the continuing growth of the Internet, the volume of
such queries is large and growing. The AS112 project aims to provide
a distributed sink for such queries in order to reduce the load on
the IN-ADDR.ARPA authoritative servers. The AS112 project is named
after the Autonomous System Number (ASN) that was assigned to it.
Prior to implementation of this technique, the AS112 project did not
accommodate the addition and removal of DNS zones elegantly. Since
additional zones of definitively local significance are known to
exist, this presents a problem. This document describes
modifications to the deployment and use of AS112 infrastructure that
will allow zones to be added and dropped much more easily.
The AS112 project is described in detail in
[I-D.ietf-dnsop-rfc6304bis].
The AS112 nameservers (PRISONER.IANA.ORG, BLACKHOLE-1.IANA.ORG and The AS112 nameservers (PRISONER.IANA.ORG, BLACKHOLE-1.IANA.ORG and
BLACKHOLE-2.IANA.ORG) are required to answer authoritatively for each BLACKHOLE-2.IANA.ORG) are required to answer authoritatively for each
and every zone that is delegated to them. and every zone that is delegated to them. If a zone is delegated to
AS112 nameservers without those nameservers being configured ahead of
If a zone is delegated to AS112 nameservers without those nameservers time to answer authoritatively for that zone, there is a detrimental
being configured ahead of time to answer authoritatively for that impact on clients following referrals for queries within that zone.
zone, there is a detrimental impact on clients following referrals This misconfiguration is colloquially known as a "lame delegation".
for queries within that zone. This misconfiguration is colloquially
known as a "lame delegation".
AS112 nameserver operators are only loosely-coordinated, and hence AS112 nameserver operators are only loosely-coordinated, and hence
adding support for a new zone (or, correspondingly, removing support adding support for a new zone (or, correspondingly, removing support
for a zone that is no longer delegated to the AS112 nameservers) is for a zone that is no longer delegated to the AS112 nameservers) is
difficult to accomplish with accuracy; testing AS112 nameservers difficult to accomplish with accuracy. Testing AS112 nameservers
remotely to see whether they are configured to answer authoritatively remotely to see whether they are configured to answer authoritatively
for a particular zone is similarly challenging since AS112 nodes are for a particular zone is similarly challenging since AS112 nodes are
distributed using anycast [RFC4786]. distributed using anycast [RFC4786].
This document proposes a more flexibl approach for sinking queries on This document defines a more flexible approach for sinking queries on
AS112 infrastructure that can be deployed alongside unmodified, AS112 infrastructure that can be deployed alongside unmodified,
existing AS112 nodes. Instead of delegating additional zones existing AS112 nodes. Instead of delegating additional zones
directly to AS112 nameservers, DNAME [RFC6672] redirection is used directly to AS112 nameservers, DNAME [RFC6672] redirection is used.
instead. This approach has the advantage that query traffic for This approach has the advantage that query traffic for arbitrary
arbitrary parts of the namespace can be directed to AS112 servers parts of the namespace can be directed to AS112 servers without those
without those servers having to be reconfigured every time a zone is servers having to be reconfigured every time a zone is added or
added or removed. removed.
This approach makes it possible for any DNS zone administrator to
sink traffic relating to parts of the global DNS namespace under
their control to the AS112 infrastructure without coordination with
the operators of AS112 infrastructure.
2. Design Overview 2. Design Overview
A new zone, EMPTY.AS112.ARPA, is delegated to a single nameserver A new zone, EMPTY.AS112.ARPA, is delegated to a single nameserver
BLACKHOLE.AS112.ARPA (IPv4 address TBAv4-1, IPv6 address TBAv6-1). BLACKHOLE.AS112.ARPA (IPv4 address TBAv4-1, IPv6 address TBAv6-1).
The IPv4 address TBAv4-1 has been assigned by the IANA such that the The IPv4 address TBAv4-1 has been assigned by the IANA such that the
address is coverable by a single IPv4 /24 prefix, and that no other address is coverable by a single IPv4 /24 prefix, and that no other
address covered by that prefix is in use. The IPv6 address TBAv6-1 address covered by that prefix is in use. The IPv6 address TBAv6-1
has been similarly assigned such that no other address within a has been similarly assigned such that no other address within a
covering /48 is in use. This addressing plan accommodates the covering /48 is in use. This addressing plan accommodates the
anycast distribution of the BLACKHOLE.AS112.ARPA service using a anycast distribution of the BLACKHOLE.AS112.ARPA service using a
single IPv4 service prefix and a single IPv6 service prefix. See single IPv4 service prefix and a single IPv6 service prefix. See
[RFC4786] for more discussion of anycast service distribution; see [RFC4786] for more discussion of anycast service distribution; see
Section 8 for the specific requests this document makes of the IANA. Section 8 for the specific requests this document makes of the IANA.
Some or all of the existing AS112 nodes should be extended to support Some or all of the existing AS112 nodes SHOULD be extended to support
these new nameserver addresses, and to host the EMPTY.AS112.ARPA these new nameserver addresses, and to host the EMPTY.AS112.ARPA
zone. See [RFC6304bis] for revised guidance to AS112 server zone. See [I-D.ietf-dnsop-rfc6304bis] for revised guidance to AS112
operators. server operators.
Each part of the DNS namespace for which it is desirable to sink Each part of the DNS namespace for which it is desirable to sink
queries at AS112 nameservers should be redirected to the queries at AS112 nameservers should be redirected to the
EMPTY.AS112.ARPA zone using DNAME [RFC6672]. See Section 3.2 for EMPTY.AS112.ARPA zone using DNAME [RFC6672]. See Section 3.2 for
guidance to zone administrators. guidance to zone administrators.
3. AS112 Operations 3. AS112 Operations
3.1. Extensions to Support DNAME Redirection 3.1. Extensions to Support DNAME Redirection
skipping to change at page 6, line 27 skipping to change at page 5, line 11
It is only necessary for a single AS112 server operator to implement It is only necessary for a single AS112 server operator to implement
these extensions for this mechanism to function as intended. It is these extensions for this mechanism to function as intended. It is
beneficial if many more than one AS112 server operators make these beneficial if many more than one AS112 server operators make these
changes, however, since that provides for greater distribution and changes, however, since that provides for greater distribution and
capacity for the nameservers serving the EMPTY.AS112.ARPA zone. It capacity for the nameservers serving the EMPTY.AS112.ARPA zone. It
is not necessary for all AS112 server operators to make these changes is not necessary for all AS112 server operators to make these changes
for the mechanism to be viable. for the mechanism to be viable.
Detailed instructions for the implementation of these extensions is Detailed instructions for the implementation of these extensions is
included in [RFC6304bis]. included in [I-D.ietf-dnsop-rfc6304bis].
3.2. Redirection of Query Traffic to AS112 Servers 3.2. Redirection of Query Traffic to AS112 Servers
Once the EMPTY.AS112.ARPA zone has been deployed using the Once the EMPTY.AS112.ARPA zone has been deployed using the
nameservers described in Section 3.1, redirections may be installed nameservers described in Section 3.1, redirections may be installed
in the DNS namespace for queries that are intended to be answered by in the DNS namespace for queries that are intended to be answered by
the AS112 infrastructure. the AS112 infrastructure.
For example, reverse queries corresponding to TEST-NET-1 For example, reverse queries corresponding to TEST-NET-1
(192.0.2.0/24) [RFC5737] could be redirected to AS112 nameservers by (192.0.2.0/24) [RFC5737] could be redirected to AS112 nameservers by
skipping to change at page 10, line 7 skipping to change at page 6, line 32
to facilitate sinking of any name in the DNS namespace by AS112 to facilitate sinking of any name in the DNS namespace by AS112
infrastructure, this mechanism supports AS112 redirection by any zone infrastructure, this mechanism supports AS112 redirection by any zone
owner in the DNS. owner in the DNS.
This document is simply concerned with provision of the AS112 This document is simply concerned with provision of the AS112
redirection service, and does not specify that any particular AS112 redirection service, and does not specify that any particular AS112
redirection be put in place. redirection be put in place.
6. DNAME Deployment Considerations 6. DNAME Deployment Considerations
DNAME was specified a significant time following the original DNAME was specified years after the original implementations of
implementations of [RFC1035], and hence universal deployment cannot [RFC1035], and hence universal deployment cannot be expected.
be expected. [RFC6672] specifies a fall-back mechanism which makes [RFC6672] specifies a fall-back mechanism which makes use of
use of synthesised CNAME RRSets for this reason. The expectation synthesised CNAME RRSets for this reason. The expectation that
that design choices in the DNAME specification ought to mitigate any design choices in the DNAME specification ought to mitigate any lack
lack of deployment is reviewed below. Experimental validation of of deployment is reviewed below. Experimental validation of those
those expectations is included in Appendix A. expectations is included in Appendix A.
It is a fundamental design requirement of AS112 service that It is a fundamental design requirement of AS112 service that
responses be cached. We can safely declare DNAME support on the responses be cached. We can safely declare DNAME support on the
authoritative server to be a prerequisite for DNAME redirection, but authoritative server to be a prerequisite for DNAME redirection, but
the cases where individual elements in resolver chains do not support the cases where individual elements in resolver chains do not support
DNAME processing deserve closer examination. DNAME processing deserve closer examination.
The expected behaviour when a DNAME response is supplied to a The expected behaviour when a DNAME response is supplied to a
resolver that does not support DNAME is that the accompanying, resolver that does not support DNAME is that the accompanying,
synthesised CNAME will be accepted and cached. Re-query frequency synthesised CNAME will be accepted and cached. Re-query frequency
skipping to change at page 12, line 9 skipping to change at page 7, line 43
of AS112.ARPA as described in Section 8 is required. of AS112.ARPA as described in Section 8 is required.
Once IAB approval has been obtained, this section may be removed Once IAB approval has been obtained, this section may be removed
prior to publication or updated to include text that confirms the prior to publication or updated to include text that confirms the
IAB's decision, at the IAB's discretion. IAB's decision, at the IAB's discretion.
8. IANA Considerations 8. IANA Considerations
8.1. Address Assignment 8.1. Address Assignment
This document requests that IANA assign IPv4 and IPv6 number
resources in conformance with section 4 of [RFC2860].
The IANA is requested to assign one IPv4 /24 netblock and register The IANA is requested to assign one IPv4 /24 netblock and register
its use in the IPv4 Special-Purpose Address Registry [RFC6890] as its use in the IPv4 Special-Purpose Address Registry [RFC6890] as
follows: follows:
+----------------------+--------------------------------+ +----------------------+-----------------------+
| Name | Value | | Name | Value |
+----------------------+--------------------------------+ +----------------------+-----------------------+
| Address Block | As determined by IANA | | Address Block | As determined by IANA |
| | | | | |
| Name | AS112-v4 | | Name | AS112-v4 |
| | | | | |
| RFC | This document (when published) | | RFC | [THIS DOCUMENT] |
| | | | | |
| Allocation Date | As determined by IANA | | Allocation Date | As determined by IANA |
| | | | | |
| Termination Date | N/A | | Termination Date | N/A |
| | | | | |
| Source | True | | Source | True |
| | | | | |
| Destination | True | | Destination | True |
| | | | | |
| Forwardable | True | | Forwardable | True |
| | | | | |
| Global | True | | Global | True |
| | | | | |
| Reserved-by-Protocol | False | | Reserved-by-Protocol | False |
+----------------------+--------------------------------+ +----------------------+-----------------------+
We suggest that IANA assign 192.31.196.0/24 from the IPv4 Recovered We suggest that IANA assign 192.31.196.0/24 from the IPv4 Recovered
Address Space Registry, but any /24 which has been unassigned and Address Space Registry, but any /24 which has been unassigned and
unadvertised for at least twelve months is acceptable. unadvertised for at least twelve months is acceptable.
The IANA is requested to assign one IPv6 /48 netblock and register The IANA is requested to assign one IPv6 /48 netblock and register
its use in the IPv6 Special-Purpose Address Registry [RFC6890] as its use in the IPv6 Special-Purpose Address Registry [RFC6890] as
follows: follows:
+----------------------+--------------------------------+ +----------------------+-----------------------+
| Name | Value | | Name | Value |
+----------------------+--------------------------------+ +----------------------+-----------------------+
| Address Block | As determined by IANA | | Address Block | As determined by IANA |
| | | | | |
| Name | AS112-v6 | | Name | AS112-v6 |
| | | | | |
| RFC | This document (when published) | | RFC | [THIS DOCUMENT] |
| | | | | |
| Allocation Date | As determined by IANA | | Allocation Date | As determined by IANA |
| | | | | |
| Termination Date | N/A | | Termination Date | N/A |
| | | | | |
| Source | True | | Source | True |
| | | | | |
| Destination | True | | Destination | True |
| | | | | |
| Forwardable | True | | Forwardable | True |
| | | | | |
| Global | True | | Global | True |
| | | | | |
| Reserved-by-Protocol | False | | Reserved-by-Protocol | False |
+----------------------+--------------------------------+ +----------------------+-----------------------+
We suggest that IANA assign 2001:112::/48 from the IETF Protocol We suggest that IANA assign 2001:112::/48 from the IETF Protocol
Assignments allocation [RFC2928], but /48 which has been unassigned Assignments allocation [RFC2928], but /48 which has been unassigned
and unadvertised for at least twelve months is acceptable. and unadvertised for at least twelve months is acceptable.
Once assigned, all occurrences of TBAv4 in this document should be Once assigned, all occurrences of TBAv4 in this document should be
replaced by the IPv4 netblock assigned, in conventional notation. replaced by the IPv4 netblock assigned, in conventional notation.
Occurrences of TBAv4-1 should be replaced with an address from the Occurrences of TBAv4-1 should be replaced with an address from the
netblock with lowest octet set to 1. Similarly, all occurrences of netblock with lowest octet set to 1. Similarly, all occurrences of
TBAv6 in this document should be replaced by the IPv6 netblock TBAv6 in this document should be replaced by the IPv6 netblock
skipping to change at page 15, line 11 skipping to change at page 11, line 11
| | | | | |
| DS-RDATA: | As chosen by the IANA, see Section 8.2 | | DS-RDATA: | As chosen by the IANA, see Section 8.2 |
+----------------+--------------------------------------------------+ +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+
9. Security Considerations 9. Security Considerations
This document presents no known additional security concerns to the This document presents no known additional security concerns to the
Internet. Internet.
For security considerations relating to AS112 service in general, see For security considerations relating to AS112 service in general, see
[RFC6304bis]. [I-D.ietf-dnsop-rfc6304bis].
10. Acknowledgements 10. Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the valuable contributions of Bob Harold and The authors acknowledge the valuable contributions of Bob Harold and
other participants in the DNSOP working group in the preparation of other participants in the DNSOP working group in the preparation of
this document. this document.
11. References 11. References
11.1. Normative References 11.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-dnsop-rfc6304bis]
Abley, J. and W. Maton, "AS112 Nameserver Operations",
draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc6304bis-04 (work in progress), July
2014.
[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and [RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
[RFC2308] Andrews, M., "Negative Caching of DNS Queries (DNS [RFC2308] Andrews, M., "Negative Caching of DNS Queries (DNS
NCACHE)", RFC 2308, March 1998. NCACHE)", RFC 2308, March 1998.
[RFC6304bis]
Abley, J. and W. Maton, "AS112 Nameserver Operations",
draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc6304bis-00 (work in progress),
February 2014.
[RFC6672] Rose, S. and W. Wijngaards, "DNAME Redirection in the [RFC6672] Rose, S. and W. Wijngaards, "DNAME Redirection in the
DNS", RFC 6672, June 2012. DNS", RFC 6672, June 2012.
11.2. Informative References 11.2. Informative References
[RFC1918] Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, R., Karrenberg, D., Groot, G., and [RFC1918] Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, R., Karrenberg, D., Groot, G., and
E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets", E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets", BCP
BCP 5, RFC 1918, February 1996. 5, RFC 1918, February 1996.
[RFC2860] Carpenter, B., Baker, F., and M. Roberts, "Memorandum of
Understanding Concerning the Technical Work of the
Internet Assigned Numbers Authority", RFC 2860, June 2000.
[RFC2928] Hinden, R., Deering, S., Fink, R., and T. Hain, "Initial [RFC2928] Hinden, R., Deering, S., Fink, R., and T. Hain, "Initial
IPv6 Sub-TLA ID Assignments", RFC 2928, September 2000. IPv6 Sub-TLA ID Assignments", RFC 2928, September 2000.
[RFC3172] Huston, G., "Management Guidelines & Operational [RFC3172] Huston, G., "Management Guidelines & Operational
Requirements for the Address and Routing Parameter Area Requirements for the Address and Routing Parameter Area
Domain ("arpa")", BCP 52, RFC 3172, September 2001. Domain ("arpa")", BCP 52, RFC 3172, September 2001.
[RFC4033] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. [RFC4033] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements", Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements", RFC
RFC 4033, March 2005. 4033, March 2005.
[RFC4786] Abley, J. and K. Lindqvist, "Operation of Anycast [RFC4786] Abley, J. and K. Lindqvist, "Operation of Anycast
Services", BCP 126, RFC 4786, December 2006. Services", BCP 126, RFC 4786, December 2006.
[RFC5737] Arkko, J., Cotton, M., and L. Vegoda, "IPv4 Address Blocks [RFC5737] Arkko, J., Cotton, M., and L. Vegoda, "IPv4 Address Blocks
Reserved for Documentation", RFC 5737, January 2010. Reserved for Documentation", RFC 5737, January 2010.
[RFC6303] Andrews, M., "Locally Served DNS Zones", BCP 163, [RFC6303] Andrews, M., "Locally Served DNS Zones", BCP 163, RFC
RFC 6303, July 2011. 6303, July 2011.
[RFC6890] Cotton, M., Vegoda, L., Bonica, R., and B. Haberman, [RFC6890] Cotton, M., Vegoda, L., Bonica, R., and B. Haberman,
"Special-Purpose IP Address Registries", BCP 153, "Special-Purpose IP Address Registries", BCP 153, RFC
RFC 6890, April 2013. 6890, April 2013.
Appendix A. Assessing Support for DNAME in the Real World Appendix A. Assessing Support for DNAME in the Real World
To measure the extent to which the DNAME construct is supported in To measure the extent to which the DNAME construct is supported in
the Internet, we have used an experimental technique to test the DNS the Internet, we have used an experimental technique to test the DNS
resolvers used by end hosts, and derive from the test a measurement resolvers used by end hosts, and derive from the test a measurement
of DNAME support within the Internet. of DNAME support within the Internet.
A.1. Methodology A.1. Methodology
skipping to change at page 20, line 7 skipping to change at page 14, line 20
The script has been encoded in Adobe Flash with a simple image in the The script has been encoded in Adobe Flash with a simple image in the
form of an online advertisement. An online advertisement network has form of an online advertisement. An online advertisement network has
been used to distribute the script. The script is invoked when the been used to distribute the script. The script is invoked when the
advertisement is presented in the end user's browser or application, advertisement is presented in the end user's browser or application,
and does not require the user to click on the supplied image in any and does not require the user to click on the supplied image in any
way. The advertisement placement parameters were set to to broadest way. The advertisement placement parameters were set to to broadest
possible scope to sample users from across the entire internet. possible scope to sample users from across the entire internet.
A.2. Results A.2. Results
The test was loaded into an advertisement distributed on the The test was loaded into an advertisement distributed on 2013-10-10
2013-10-10 and 2013-10-11. and 2013-10-11.
+--------------------+---------+------------+ +--------------------+---------+------------+
| | Count | Percentage | | | Count | Percentage |
+--------------------+---------+------------+ +--------------------+---------+------------+
| Recorded Results: | 338,478 | | | Recorded Results: | 338,478 | |
| | | | | | | |
| A or B Loaded: | 331,896 | 98.1% | | A or B Loaded: | 331,896 | 98.1% |
| | | | | | | |
| A Fail and B Fail: | 6,492 | 1.9% | | A Fail and B Fail: | 6,492 | 1.9% |
| | | | | | | |
skipping to change at page 21, line 20 skipping to change at page 15, line 20
00 Initial write-up of Brian's idea, circulated for the purposes of 00 Initial write-up of Brian's idea, circulated for the purposes of
entertainment. entertainment.
01 Some particularly egregious spelling mistakes fixed. Warren 01 Some particularly egregious spelling mistakes fixed. Warren
Kumari and George Michaelson added as co-authors. Intended status Kumari and George Michaelson added as co-authors. Intended status
changed to informational. Appendix on DNAME testing added, changed to informational. Appendix on DNAME testing added,
describing an experiment conducted by Geoff Huston and George describing an experiment conducted by Geoff Huston and George
Michaelson. Michaelson.
00 Adopted by dnsop in IETF88, Vancouver; resubmitted as 00 Adopted by dnsop in IETF88, Vancouver; resubmitted as draft-ietf-
draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-dname. Changed contact info for Brian. dnsop-as112-dname. Changed contact info for Brian.
01 Minor updates following submission of 01 Minor updates following submission of draft-jabley-dnsop-
draft-jabley-dnsop-rfc6304bis. rfc6304bis.
02 Text in IANA Considerations section dealing with address 02 Text in IANA Considerations section dealing with address
assignments modified following informal advice received from Leo assignments modified following informal advice received from Leo
Vegoda. Vegoda.
03 Updated references to 6304 following guidance from working group 03 Updated references to 6304 following guidance from working group
chairs. chairs.
04 Corrected an error picked up by Bob Harold. 04 Corrected an error picked up by Bob Harold.
05 Addressed various comments from the IESG and IAB. Updated
Brian's contact info. Minor spelling and grammatical corrections.
Added text to the abstract and introduction to reinforce the point
that this approach allows liberal use of AS112 infrastructure
without coordination with AS112 operators.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Joe Abley Joe Abley
Dyn, Inc. Dyn, Inc.
470 Moore Street 186 Albert Street, Suite 103
London, ON N6C 2C2 London, ON N6A 1M1
Canada Canada
Phone: +1 519 670 9327 Phone: +1 519 670 9327
Email: jabley@dyn.com Email: jabley@dyn.com
Brian Dickson Brian Dickson
Verisign Labs Twitter, Inc.
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190
USA
Email: bdickson@verisign.com Email: bdickson@twitter.com
Warren Kumari Warren Kumari
Google Google
1600 Amphitheatre Parkway 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
Mountain View, CA 94043 Mountain View, CA 94043
USA USA
Email: warren@kumari.net Email: warren@kumari.net
George Michaelson George Michaelson
 End of changes. 35 change blocks. 
153 lines changed or deleted 177 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/