draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix-04.txt   draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix-05.txt 
dnsop D. Crocker dnsop D. Crocker
Internet-Draft Brandenburg InternetWorking Internet-Draft Brandenburg InternetWorking
Updates: 2782, 3263, 3404, 3529, 3620, August 21, 2018 Updates: 2782, 3263, 3404, 3529, 3620, October 10, 2018
3832, 3861, 3887, 3921, 3958, 3832, 3861, 3887, 6121, 3958,
4120, 4227, 4386, 4387, 4976, 4120, 4227, 4386, 4387, 4976,
5026, 5328, 5389, 5415, 5518, 5026, 5328, 5389, 5415, 5518,
5555, 5617, 5679, 5766, 5780, 5555, 5617, 5679, 5766, 5780,
5804, 5864, 5928, 6011, 6120, 5804, 5864, 5928, 6011, 6120,
6186, 6376, 6733, 7208, 7489, 6186, 6376, 6733, 6763, 7208,
8145 (if approved) 7489, 8145 (if approved)
Intended status: Best Current Practice Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: February 22, 2019 Expires: April 13, 2019
DNS Attrleaf Changes: Fixing Specifications with Underscored Node Name DNS Attrleaf Changes: Fixing Specifications with Underscored Node Name
Use Use
draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix-04 draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix-05
Abstract Abstract
Original uses of an underscore character as a domain node name Original uses of an underscore character as a domain node name
prefix, which creates a space for constrained interpretation of prefix, which creates a space for constrained interpretation of
resource records, were specified without the benefit of an IANA resource records, were specified without the benefit of an IANA
registry. This produced an entirely uncoordinated set of name- registry. This produced an entirely uncoordinated set of name-
creation activities, all drawing from the same namespace. A registry creation activities, all drawing from the same namespace. A registry
now has been defined. However the existing specifications that use now has been defined. However the existing specifications that use
underscore naming need to be modified, to be in line with the new underscore naming need to be modified, to be in line with the new
skipping to change at page 1, line 49 skipping to change at page 1, line 49
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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://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 February 22, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 13, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 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
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://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
skipping to change at page 2, line 30 skipping to change at page 2, line 30
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Underscored RRset Use in Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Underscored RRset Use in Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. TXT RRset Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. TXT RRset Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. SRV RRset Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.2. SRV RRset Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. URI RRset Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.3. URI RRset Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Underscored Template Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. Underscored Template Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1. SRV Specification Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1. SRV Specification Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. URI Specification Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2. URI Specification Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.3. DNSSEC Signaling Specifiction Changes . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.3. DNSSEC Signaling Specification Changes . . . . . . . . . 9
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.2. References -- Informative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.2. References -- Informative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Original uses of an underscore character as a domain node name Original uses of an underscore character as a domain node name
[RFC1035] prefix, which creates a space for constrained [RFC1035] prefix, which creates a space for constrained
interpretation of resource records, were specified without the interpretation of resource records, were specified without the
benefit of an [IANA-reg] registry. This produced an entirely benefit of an [IANA-reg] registry. This produced an entirely
uncoordinated set of name-creation activities, all drawing from the uncoordinated set of name-creation activities, all drawing from the
same namespace. A registry has been now defined, and that document same namespace. A registry has been now defined, and that document
skipping to change at page 4, line 11 skipping to change at page 4, line 11
the information needed for adapting such specifications to the use of the information needed for adapting such specifications to the use of
the IANA DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry [Attrleaf]. the IANA DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry [Attrleaf].
Hence the approach is meant both as an update to these existing Hence the approach is meant both as an update to these existing
specifications, and as guidance for changes when those documents are specifications, and as guidance for changes when those documents are
revised. revised.
For any document that specifies the use of a "TXT" RRset under one or For any document that specifies the use of a "TXT" RRset under one or
more underscored names, that 'global' name is expected to be more underscored names, that 'global' name is expected to be
registered in the IANA DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry registered in the IANA DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry
[Attrleaf]. An effort has been made to locate existing drafts that [Attrleaf]. An effort has been made to locate existing drafts that
do this, register the global underscored names, and list them in this do this, register the global underscored names, and list them in the
document. initial set of names added to the registry.
If a public specification that defines use of a "TXT" calls for the Note that a public specification, which defines use of an RRset and
use of an underscore-prefixed domain name, the global underscored calls for the use of an underscore-prefixed domain name, its global
name -- the one closest to the root -- MUST be entered into this underscored name -- the one closest to the root -- is required to be
registry, if it is not already registered. entered into this registry, if it is not already registered.
[Attrleaf].
Here is a template of suggested text for this to appear in the IANA Here is a template of suggested text for this to appear in the IANA
Considerations section of the specification: Considerations section of the specification:
"Per" [Attrleaf] "please add the following entry to the DNS "Per" [Attrleaf] "please add the following entry to the DNS
Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry:" Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry:"
+--------+----------------+-----------------------------------------+ +--------+----------------+-----------------------------------------+
| RR | _NODE NAME | REFERENCE | | RR | _NODE NAME | REFERENCE |
| Type | | | | Type | | |
skipping to change at page 5, line 6 skipping to change at page 5, line 9
provides the information needed for adapting such specifications to provides the information needed for adapting such specifications to
the use of the IANA DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry the use of the IANA DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry
[Attrleaf]. Hence the approach is meant both as an update to these [Attrleaf]. Hence the approach is meant both as an update to these
existing specifications, and as guidance for changes when those existing specifications, and as guidance for changes when those
documents are revised. documents are revised.
For any document that specifies the use of an "SRV" RRset, the global For any document that specifies the use of an "SRV" RRset, the global
('protocol') underscored name is expected to be registered in the ('protocol') underscored name is expected to be registered in the
IANA DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry [Attrleaf]. An IANA DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry [Attrleaf]. An
effort has been made to locate existing drafts that do this, register effort has been made to locate existing drafts that do this, register
the global underscored names, and list them in this document. the global underscored names, and list them in the initial set of
names added to the registry.
If a public specification that defines use of a "SRV" calls for the Note that a public specification, which defines use of an RRset and
use of an underscore-prefixed domain name, the global underscored calls for the use of an underscore-prefixed domain name, its global
name -- the one closest to the root -- MUST be entered into this underscored name -- the one closest to the root -- is required to be
registry, if it is not already registered. entered into this registry, if it is not already registered.
[Attrleaf].
Here is a template of suggested text for this to appear in the IANA Here is a template of suggested text for this to appear in the IANA
Considerations section of the specification: Considerations section of the specification:
"Per" [Attrleaf] "please add the following entry to the DNS "Per" [Attrleaf] "please add the following entry to the DNS
Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry:" Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry:"
+--------+----------------------+-----------------------------------+ +--------+----------------------+-----------------------------------+
| RR | _NODE NAME | REFERENCE | | RR | _NODE NAME | REFERENCE |
| Type | | | | Type | | |
skipping to change at page 6, line 5 skipping to change at page 6, line 7
existing specifications, and as guidance for changes when those existing specifications, and as guidance for changes when those
documents are revised. documents are revised.
For any document that specifies the use of a "URI" RRset, the global For any document that specifies the use of a "URI" RRset, the global
('protocol' or highest-level enumservice) underscored name is ('protocol' or highest-level enumservice) underscored name is
expected to be registered in the IANA DNS Underscore Global Scoped expected to be registered in the IANA DNS Underscore Global Scoped
Entry Registry [Attrleaf]. An effort has been made to locate Entry Registry [Attrleaf]. An effort has been made to locate
existing drafts that do this and register the associated 'protocol' existing drafts that do this and register the associated 'protocol'
names. names.
If a public specification that defines use of a "URI" calls for the Note that a public specification, which defines use of an RRset and
use of an underscore-prefixed domain name, the global underscored calls for the use of an underscore-prefixed domain name, its global
name -- the one closest to the root -- MUST be entered into this underscored name -- the one closest to the root -- is required to be
registry, if it is not already registered. entered into this registry, if it is not already registered.
[Attrleaf].
Here is a template of suggested text for this to appear in the IANA Here is a template of suggested text for this to appear in the IANA
Considerations section of the specification: Considerations section of the specification:
"Per" [Attrleaf] "please add the following entry to the DNS "Per" [Attrleaf] "please add the following entry to the DNS
Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry:" Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry:"
+-------+---------------------------+-------------------------------+ +-------+---------------------------+-------------------------------+
| RR | _NODE NAME | REFERENCE | | RR | _NODE NAME | REFERENCE |
| Type | | | | Type | | |
skipping to change at page 6, line 30 skipping to change at page 6, line 33
| URI | _{DNS 'protocol' or | {citation for the document | | URI | _{DNS 'protocol' or | {citation for the document |
| | Enumservice node name} | making the addition.} | | | Enumservice node name} | making the addition.} |
+-------+---------------------------+-------------------------------+ +-------+---------------------------+-------------------------------+
Table 3: Underscore Global Registry Entry Table 3: Underscore Global Registry Entry
3. Underscored Template Specifications 3. Underscored Template Specifications
3.1. SRV Specification Changes 3.1. SRV Specification Changes
The specification for a domain name under, which an SRV [RFC2782] The specification for a domain name, under which an SRV [RFC2782]
resource record appears, provides a template for use of underscored resource record appears, provides a template for use of underscored
node names. The global underscored name, is characterised as node names. The global underscored name, is characterised as
indicating the 'protocol' that is associated with "SRV" RR usage. indicating the 'protocol' that is associated with "SRV" RR usage.
The text of that existing specification is hereby updated from: Text of that existing specification is changed as follows:
OLD:
The format of the SRV RR The format of the SRV RR
Here is the format of the SRV RR, whose DNS type code is 33: Here is the format of the SRV RR, whose DNS type code is 33:
_Service._Proto.Name TTL Class SRV Priority Weight Port Target _Service._Proto.Name TTL Class SRV Priority Weight Port Target
... ...
Proto Proto
The symbolic name of the desired protocol, with an underscore The symbolic name of the desired protocol, with an underscore
(_) prepended to prevent collisions with DNS labels that occur (_) prepended to prevent collisions with DNS labels that occur
in nature. _TCP and _UDP are at present the most useful values in nature. _TCP and _UDP are at present the most useful values
for this field, though any name defined by Assigned Numbers or for this field, though any name defined by Assigned Numbers or
locally may be used (as for Service). The Proto is case locally may be used (as for Service). The Proto is case
insensitive. insensitive.
And is to be updated to the new text: NEW:
The format of the SRV RR The format of the SRV RR
Here is the format of the SRV RR, whose DNS type code is 33: Here is the format of the SRV RR, whose DNS type code is 33:
"_Service._Proto.Name TTL Class SRV Priority Weight Port "_Service._Proto.Name TTL Class SRV Priority Weight Port
Target" _..._ Target"
_..._
Proto Proto
The symbolic name of the desired protocol, with an The symbolic name of the desired protocol, with an
underscore (_) prepended to prevent collisions with DNS underscore (_) prepended to prevent collisions with DNS
labels that occur in nature. _TCP and _UDP are at present labels that occur in nature. _TCP and _UDP are at present
the most useful values for this field. The Proto is case the most useful values for this field. The Proto is case
insensitive. insensitive.
The SRV RRset protocol (global) underscored name SHOULD be The SRV RRset protocol (global) underscored name SHOULD be
skipping to change at page 7, line 32 skipping to change at page 8, line 5
Registry [Attrleaf]. Registry [Attrleaf].
3.2. URI Specification Changes 3.2. URI Specification Changes
Specification for the domain name under which a URI [RFC7553] Specification for the domain name under which a URI [RFC7553]
resource record occurs is similar to that for the SRV [RFC2782] resource record occurs is similar to that for the SRV [RFC2782]
resource record, although the text refers only to 'service' name, resource record, although the text refers only to 'service' name,
rather than distinguishing 'service' from 'protocol'. Further, the rather than distinguishing 'service' from 'protocol'. Further, the
URI RR specification permits alternative underscored naming schemes: URI RR specification permits alternative underscored naming schemes:
One matches what is used for "SRV", with the global underscored One matches what is used for "SRV", with the global underscored
name called "protocol'. name called "protocol'.
The other is based on a reversing of an Enumservice [RFC6117] The other is based on a reversing of an Enumservice [RFC6117]
sequence. sequence.
The text of the existing specification is hereby updated from: Text of that existing specification is changed as follows:
OLD:
4.1. Owner Name, Class, and Type 4.1. Owner Name, Class, and Type
The URI owner name is subject to special conventions. The URI owner name is subject to special conventions.
Just like the SRV RR [RFC2782], the URI RR has service information Just like the SRV RR [RFC2782], the URI RR has service information
encoded in its owner name. In order to encode the service for a encoded in its owner name. In order to encode the service for a
specific owner name, one uses service parameters. Valid service specific owner name, one uses service parameters. Valid service
parameters are those registered by IANA in the "Service Name and parameters are those registered by IANA in the "Service Name and
Transport Protocol Port Number Registry" [RFC6335] or as "Enumservice Transport Protocol Port Number Registry" [RFC6335] or as "Enumservice
skipping to change at page 8, line 32 skipping to change at page 8, line 42
For example, suppose we are looking for the URI for a service with For example, suppose we are looking for the URI for a service with
ENUM Service Parameter "A:B:C" for host example.com. Then we would ENUM Service Parameter "A:B:C" for host example.com. Then we would
query for (QNAME,QTYPE)=("_C._B._A.example.com","URI"). query for (QNAME,QTYPE)=("_C._B._A.example.com","URI").
As another example, suppose we are looking for the URI for a service As another example, suppose we are looking for the URI for a service
with Service Name "A" and Transport Protocol "B" for host with Service Name "A" and Transport Protocol "B" for host
example.com. Then we would query for example.com. Then we would query for
(QNAME,QTYPE)=("_A._B.example.com","URI"). (QNAME,QTYPE)=("_A._B.example.com","URI").
And is to be updated to the new text: NEW:
4.1. Owner Name, Class, and Type 4.1. Owner Name, Class, and Type
The URI owner name is subject to special conventions. The URI owner name is subject to special conventions.
As for the SRV RRset [RFC2782], the URI RRset global (highest- As for the SRV RRset [RFC2782], the URI RRset global (highest-
level) underscored name SHOULD be registered in the IANA DNS level) underscored name SHOULD be registered in the IANA DNS
Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry [Attrleaf]. Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry [Attrleaf].
Just like the SRV RRset, the URI RRset has service information Just like the SRV RRset, the URI RRset has service information
encoded in its owner name. In order to encode the service for encoded in its owner name. In order to encode the service for
a specific owner name, one uses service parameters. Valid a specific owner name, one uses service parameters. Valid
service parameters are: service parameters are:
+ Those registered by IANA in the "Service Name and Transport + Those registered by IANA in the "Service Name and Transport
Protocol Port Number Registry [RFC6335]" The underscore is Protocol Port Number Registry" [RFC6335] . The underscore is
prepended to the service parameters to avoid collisions with prepended to the service parameters to avoid collisions with
DNS labels that occur in nature, and the order is reversed DNS labels that occur in nature, and the order is reversed
to make it possible to do delegations, if needed, to to make it possible to do delegations, if needed, to
different zones (and therefore providers of DNS). different zones (and therefore providers of DNS).
+ Those listed in "Enumservice Registrations [RFC6117]. The + Those listed in "Enumservice Registrations" [RFC6117]. The
Enumservice Registration parameters are reversed (i.e., Enumservice Registration parameters are reversed (i.e.,
subtype(s) before type), prepended with an underscore (_), subtype(s) before type), prepended with an underscore (_),
and prepended to the owner name in separate labels. The and prepended to the owner name in separate labels. The
highest-level (global) underscored Enumservice name becomes highest-level (global) underscored Enumservice name becomes
the global Attrleaf name to register. the global Attrleaf name to register.
For example, suppose we are looking for the URI for a service For example, suppose we are looking for the URI for a service
with ENUM Service Parameter "A:B:C" for host example.com. Then with ENUM Service Parameter "A:B:C" for host example.com. Then
we would query for we would query for
(QNAME,QTYPE)=("_C._B._A.example.com","URI"). (QNAME,QTYPE)=("_C._B._A.example.com","URI").
As another example, suppose we are looking for the URI for a As another example, suppose we are looking for the URI for a
service with Service Name "A" and Transport Protocol "B" for service with Service Name "A" and Transport Protocol "B" for
host example.com. Then we would query for host example.com. Then we would query for
(QNAME,QTYPE)=("_A._B.example.com","URI"). (QNAME,QTYPE)=("_A._B.example.com","URI").
3.3. DNSSEC Signaling Specifiction Changes 3.3. DNSSEC Signaling Specification Changes
" Signaling Trust Anchor Knowledge in DNS Security Extensions "Signaling Trust Anchor Knowledge in DNS Security Extensions
(DNSSEC)" [RFC8145] defines a use of DNS node names that effectively (DNSSEC)" [RFC8145] defines a use of DNS node names that effectively
consumes all names beginning with the string "_ta-", when using the consumes all names beginning with the string "_ta-", when using the
NUL RR in the query. NULL RR in the query.
Section 5.1, "Query Format", of the specification is changed as Text of Section 5.1, "Query Format", of that existing specification,
follows: is changed as follows:
OLD: OLD:
For example, a validating DNS resolver ... QNAME=_ta-4444. For example, a validating DNS resolver ... QNAME=_ta-4444.
NEW: NEW:
For example, a validating DNS resolver ... QNAME=_ta-4444. For example, a validating DNS resolver ... QNAME=_ta-4444.
Under the NULL RR, an entry is registered in the IANA DNS Under the NULL RR, an entry is registered in the IANA DNS
Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry [Attrleaf] for all node Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry [Attrleaf] for all node
names beginning with "_ta-". names beginning with "_ta-".
4. IANA Considerations 4. IANA Considerations
Although this document makes reference to IANA registries, it Although this document makes reference to IANA registries, it
introduces no new IANA registries or procedures. introduces no new IANA registries or procedures.
skipping to change at page 10, line 35 skipping to change at page 10, line 44
2011. 2011.
[RFC7553] Falstrom, P. and O. Kolkman, "The Uniform Resource [RFC7553] Falstrom, P. and O. Kolkman, "The Uniform Resource
Identifier (URI) DNS Resource Record", RFC 7553, Identifier (URI) DNS Resource Record", RFC 7553,
ISSN 2070-1721, June 2015. ISSN 2070-1721, June 2015.
[RFC8145] Wessels, D., Kumari, W., and P. Hoffman, "Signaling Trust [RFC8145] Wessels, D., Kumari, W., and P. Hoffman, "Signaling Trust
Anchor Knowledge in DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC)", Anchor Knowledge in DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC)",
RFC 8145, April 2017. RFC 8145, April 2017.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", RFC 8162, May 2017.
6.2. References -- Informative 6.2. References -- Informative
[IANA-reg] [IANA-reg]
"Protocol Registries", URL https://www.iana.org/protocols, "Protocol Registries", URL https://www.iana.org/protocols,
2018. 2018.
[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.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
skipping to change at page 11, line 30 skipping to change at page 11, line 40
Microsystems, IBM, and IBM, "Remote Service Discovery in Microsystems, IBM, and IBM, "Remote Service Discovery in
the Service Location Protocol (SLP) via DNS SRV", the Service Location Protocol (SLP) via DNS SRV",
RFC 3832, July 2004. RFC 3832, July 2004.
[RFC3861] Peterson, J., "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging [RFC3861] Peterson, J., "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging
and Presence", RFC 3861, August 2004. and Presence", RFC 3861, August 2004.
[RFC3887] "Message Tracking Query Protocol", RFC 3887, September [RFC3887] "Message Tracking Query Protocol", RFC 3887, September
2007. 2007.
[RFC3921] Saint-Andre, P., Ed., "Extensible Messaging and Presence
Protocol (XMPP): Instant Messaging and Presence",
RFC 3921, DOI 10.17487/RFC3921, October 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3921>.
[RFC3958] Daigle, L. and A. Newton, "Domain-Based Application [RFC3958] Daigle, L. and A. Newton, "Domain-Based Application
Service Location Using SRV RRs and the Dynamic Delegation Service Location Using SRV RRs and the Dynamic Delegation
Discovery Service (DDDS)", RFC 3958, January 2005. Discovery Service (DDDS)", RFC 3958, January 2005.
[RFC4120] USC-ISI, MIT, MIT, and MIT, "The Kerberos Network [RFC4120] USC-ISI, MIT, MIT, and MIT, "The Kerberos Network
Authentication Service (V5)", RFC 4120, July 2005. Authentication Service (V5)", RFC 4120, July 2005.
[RFC4227] O'Tuathail, E. and M. Rose, "Using the Simple Object [RFC4227] O'Tuathail, E. and M. Rose, "Using the Simple Object
Access Protocol (SOAP) in Blocks Extensible Exchange Access Protocol (SOAP) in Blocks Extensible Exchange
Protocol (BEEP)", RFC 4227, January 2006. Protocol (BEEP)", RFC 4227, January 2006.
skipping to change at page 13, line 21 skipping to change at page 13, line 29
[RFC5928] Petit-Huguenin, M., "Traversal Using Relays around NAT [RFC5928] Petit-Huguenin, M., "Traversal Using Relays around NAT
(TURN) Resolution Mechanism", RFC 5928, August 2010. (TURN) Resolution Mechanism", RFC 5928, August 2010.
[RFC6011] Lawrence, S., Ed. and J. Elwell, "Session Initiation [RFC6011] Lawrence, S., Ed. and J. Elwell, "Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP) User Agent Configuration", RFC 6011, Protocol (SIP) User Agent Configuration", RFC 6011,
October 2010. October 2010.
[RFC6120] Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence [RFC6120] Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence
Protocol (XMPP): Core", RFC 6120, March 2011. Protocol (XMPP): Core", RFC 6120, March 2011.
[RFC6121] Saint-Andre, P., Ed., "Extensible Messaging and Presence
Protocol (XMPP): Instant Messaging and Presence",
RFC 6121, DOI 10.17487/RFC6121, March 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6121>.
[RFC6186] Daboo, C., "Use of SRV Records for Locating Email [RFC6186] Daboo, C., "Use of SRV Records for Locating Email
Submission/Access Services", RFC 6186, March 2011. Submission/Access Services", RFC 6186, March 2011.
[RFC6376] Crocker, D., Hansen, T., and M. Kucherawy, "DomainKeys [RFC6376] Crocker, D., Hansen, T., and M. Kucherawy, "DomainKeys
Identified Mail (DKIM) Signatures", RFC 6376, Sept 2011. Identified Mail (DKIM) Signatures", RFC 6376, Sept 2011.
[RFC6733] Fajardo, V., Ed., Arkko, J., Loughney, J., and G. Zorn, [RFC6733] Fajardo, V., Ed., Arkko, J., Loughney, J., and G. Zorn,
Ed., "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 6733, Ed., "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 6733,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6733, October 2012, DOI 10.17487/RFC6733, October 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6733>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6733>.
[RFC6763] Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "DNS-Based Service
Discovery", RFC 6763, DOI 10.17487/RFC6763, February 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6763>.
[RFC7208] Kitterman, S., "Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for [RFC7208] Kitterman, S., "Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for
Authorizing Use of Domains in E-Mail, Version 1", Authorizing Use of Domains in E-Mail, Version 1",
RFC 7208, April 2014. RFC 7208, April 2014.
[RFC7489] Kucherawy, M., Ed. and E. Zwicky, Ed., "Domain-based [RFC7489] Kucherawy, M., Ed. and E. Zwicky, Ed., "Domain-based
Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance
(DMARC)", RFC 7489, March 2015. (DMARC)", RFC 7489, March 2015.
[RFC7671] Dukhovni, V. and W. Hardaker, "The DNS-Based [RFC7671] Dukhovni, V. and W. Hardaker, "The DNS-Based
Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) Protocol: Updates Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) Protocol: Updates
 End of changes. 31 change blocks. 
50 lines changed or deleted 67 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/