draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-02.txt   draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-03.txt 
Network Working Group M. Andrews Network Working Group M. Andrews
Internet-Draft ISC Internet-Draft ISC
Intended status: Best Current June 8, 2007 Intended status: Best Current November 19, 2007
Practice Practice
Expires: December 10, 2007 Expires: May 22, 2008
Locally-served DNS Zones Locally-served DNS Zones
draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-02 draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-03
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware 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 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. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
skipping to change at page 1, line 35 skipping to change at page 1, line 35
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 10, 2007. This Internet-Draft will expire on May 22, 2008.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
Abstract Abstract
Experience has shown that there are a number of DNS zones all Experience has shown that there are a number of DNS zones all
iterative resolvers and recursive nameservers should, unless iterative resolvers and recursive nameservers should, unless
configured otherwise, automatically serve. RFC 4193 specifies that configured otherwise, automatically serve. RFC 4193 specifies that
skipping to change at page 2, line 13 skipping to change at page 2, line 13
and other well known zones with similar characteristics. and other well known zones with similar characteristics.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Reserved Words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Reserved Words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Effects on sites using RFC 1918 addresses. . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Effects on sites using RFC 1918 addresses. . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Changes to Iterative Resolver Behaviour. . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Changes to Iterative Resolver Behaviour. . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Lists Of Zones Covered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Lists Of Zones Covered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. RFC 1918 Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.1. RFC 1918 Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.2. RFC 3330 Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.2. RFC 3330 Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.3. Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.3. Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.4. IPv6 Locally Assigned Local Addresses . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.4. IPv6 Locally Assigned Local Addresses . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.5. IPv6 Link Local Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.5. IPv6 Link Local Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Zones that are Out-Of-Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Zones that are Out-Of-Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Appendix A. Change History [To Be Removed on Publication] . . . . 9 Appendix A. Change History [To Be Removed on Publication] . . . . 10
A.1. draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-02.txt . . . . . . . 9 A.1. draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-03.txt . . . . . . . 10
A.2. draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-01.txt . . . . . . . 9 A.2. draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-02.txt . . . . . . . 10
A.3. draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-00.txt . . . . . . . 9 A.3. draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-01.txt . . . . . . . 10
A.4. draft-andrews-full-service-resolvers-03.txt . . . . . . . 9 A.4. draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-00.txt . . . . . . . 11
A.5. draft-andrews-full-service-resolvers-02.txt . . . . . . . 9 A.5. draft-andrews-full-service-resolvers-03.txt . . . . . . . 11
Appendix B. Proposed Status [To Be Removed on Publication] . . . 9 A.6. draft-andrews-full-service-resolvers-02.txt . . . . . . . 11
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Appendix B. Proposed Status [To Be Removed on Publication] . . . 11
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 11 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 12
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Experience has shown that there are a number of DNS [RFC 1034] [RFC Experience has shown that there are a number of DNS [RFC 1034] [RFC
1035] zones that all iterative resolvers and recursive nameservers 1035] zones that all iterative resolvers and recursive nameservers
SHOULD, unless intentionally configured otherwise, automatically SHOULD, unless intentionally configured otherwise, automatically
serve. These zones include, but are not limited to, the IN-ADDR.ARPA serve. These zones include, but are not limited to, the IN-ADDR.ARPA
zones for the address space allocated by [RFC 1918] and the IP6.ARPA zones for the address space allocated by [RFC 1918] and the IP6.ARPA
zones for locally assigned unique local IPv6 addresses, [RFC 4193]. zones for locally assigned unique local IPv6 addresses, [RFC 4193].
This recommendation is made because data has shown that significant This recommendation is made because data has shown that significant
leakage of queries for these name spaces is occurring, despite leakage of queries for these name spaces is occurring, despite
instructions to restrict them, and because it has therefore become instructions to restrict them, and because it has therefore become
necessary to deploy sacrificial name servers to to protect the necessary to deploy sacrificial name servers to protect the immediate
immediate parent name servers for these zones from excessive, parent name servers for these zones from excessive, unintentional,
unintentional, query load [AS112]. There is every expectation that query load [AS112] [I-D.draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-ops]
the query load will continue to increase unless steps are taken as [I-D.draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-under-attack-help-help]. There is every
outlined here. expectation that the query load will continue to increase unless
steps are taken as outlined here.
Additionally, queries from clients behind badly configured firewalls Additionally, queries from clients behind badly configured firewalls
that allow outgoing queries for these name spaces but drop the that allow outgoing queries for these name spaces but drop the
responses put a significant load on the root servers. They also responses, put a significant load on the root servers (forward but no
cause operational load for the root server operators as they have to reverse zones configured). They also cause operational load for the
reply to queries about why the root servers are "attacking" these root server operators as they have to reply to enquiries about why
clients. Changing the default configuration will address all these the root servers are "attacking" these clients. Changing the default
issues for the zones listed in Section 4. configuration will address all these issues for the zones listed in
Section 4.
[RFC 4193] recommends that queries for D.F.IP6.ARPA be handled [RFC 4193] recommends that queries for D.F.IP6.ARPA be handled
locally. This document extends the recommendation to cover the IN- locally. This document extends the recommendation to cover the IN-
ADDR.ARPA zones for [RFC 1918] and other well known IN-ADDR.ARPA and ADDR.ARPA zones for [RFC 1918] and other well known IN-ADDR.ARPA and
IP6.ARPA zones for which queries should not appear on the public IP6.ARPA zones for which queries should not appear on the public
Internet. Internet.
It is hoped that by doing this the number of sacrificial servers It is hoped that by doing this the number of sacrificial servers
[AS112] will not have to be increased, and may in time be reduced. [AS112] will not have to be increased, and may in time be reduced.
skipping to change at page 4, line 27 skipping to change at page 4, line 27
The most significant impact will be felt at sites that make use of The most significant impact will be felt at sites that make use of
delegations for [RFC 1918] addresses and have populated these zones. delegations for [RFC 1918] addresses and have populated these zones.
These sites will need to override the default configuration expressed These sites will need to override the default configuration expressed
in this document to allow resolution to continue. Typically, such in this document to allow resolution to continue. Typically, such
sites will be fully disconnected from the Internet and have their own sites will be fully disconnected from the Internet and have their own
root servers for their own non-Internet DNS tree. root servers for their own non-Internet DNS tree.
3. Changes to Iterative Resolver Behaviour. 3. Changes to Iterative Resolver Behaviour.
Unless configured otherwise, an iterative resolver will now return Unless configured otherwise, an iterative resolver will now return
name errors (RCODE=3) for queries within the zones in Section 4, with authoritatively (aa=1) name errors (RCODE=3) for queries within the
the obvious exception of queries for the zone name itself where SOA, zones in Section 4, with the obvious exception of queries for the
NS and "no data" responses will be returned as appropriate to the zone name itself where SOA, NS and "no data" responses will be
query type. One common way to do this is to serve empty (SOA and NS returned as appropriate to the query type. One common way to do this
only) zones. is to serve empty (SOA and NS only) zones.
An implementation of this recommendation MUST provide a mechanism to An implementation of this recommendation MUST provide a mechanism to
disable this new behaviour, and SHOULD do so on a zone by zone basis. disable this new behaviour, and SHOULD allow this decision on a zone
by zone basis.
If using empty zones one SHOULD NOT use the same NS and SOA records If using empty zones one SHOULD NOT use the same NS and SOA records
as used on the public Internet servers as that will make it harder to as used on the public Internet servers as that will make it harder to
detect leakage to the public Internet servers. This document detect the origin of the responses and thus any leakage to the public
recommends that the NS record defaults to the name of the zone and Internet servers. This document recommends that the NS record
the SOA MNAME defaults to the name of the only NS RR's target. The defaults to the name of the zone and the SOA MNAME defaults to the
SOA RNAME should default to "nobody.invalid." [RFC 2606]. name of the only NS RR's target. The SOA RNAME should default to
Implementations SHOULD provide a mechanism to set these values. No "nobody.invalid." [RFC 2606]. Implementations SHOULD provide a
address records need to be provided for the name server. mechanism to set these values. No address records need to be
provided for the name server.
Below is an example of a generic empty zone in master file format. Below is an example of a generic empty zone in master file format.
It will produce a negative cache TTL of 3 hours. It will produce a negative cache TTL of 3 hours.
@ 10800 IN SOA @ nobody.invalid. 1 3600 1200 604800 10800 @ 10800 IN SOA @ nobody.invalid. 1 3600 1200 604800 10800 @ 10800
@ 10800 IN NS @ IN NS @
The SOA RR is needed to support negative caching [RFC 2308] of name The SOA RR is needed to support negative caching [RFC 2308] of name
error responses and to point clients to the primary master for DNS error responses and to point clients to the primary master for DNS
dynamic updates. dynamic updates.
SOA values of particular importance are the MNAME, the SOA RR's TTL SOA values of particular importance are the MNAME, the SOA RR's TTL
and the negTTL value. Both TTL values SHOULD match. The rest of the and the negTTL value. Both TTL values SHOULD match. The rest of the
SOA timer values MAY be chosen arbitrarily since it they are not SOA timer values MAY be chosen arbitrarily since they are not
intended to control any zone transfer activity. intended to control any zone transfer activity.
The NS RR is needed as some UPDATE clients use NS queries to discover The NS RR is needed as some UPDATE clients use NS queries to discover
the zone to be updated. Having no address records for the name the zone to be updated. Having no address records for the name
server should abort UPDATE processing in the client. server is expected to abort UPDATE [RFC 2136] processing in the
client.
4. Lists Of Zones Covered 4. Lists Of Zones Covered
The following subsections are intended to seed the IANA registry as
requested in the IANA Considerations Section. The zone name is the
entity to be registered.
4.1. RFC 1918 Zones 4.1. RFC 1918 Zones
10.IN-ADDR.ARPA The following zones correspond to the IPv4 address space reserved in
16.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA [RFC 1918].
17.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA
18.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA +----------------------+
19.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA | Zone |
20.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA +----------------------+
21.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA | 10.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
22.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA | 16.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
23.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA | 17.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
24.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA | 18.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
25.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA | 19.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
26.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA | 20.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
27.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA | 21.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
28.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA | 22.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
29.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA | 23.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
30.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA | 24.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
31.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA | 25.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
168.192.IN-ADDR.ARPA | 26.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
| 27.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
| 28.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
| 29.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
| 30.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
| 31.172.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
| 168.192.IN-ADDR.ARPA |
+----------------------+
4.2. RFC 3330 Zones 4.2. RFC 3330 Zones
See [RFC 3330]. The following zones correspond to those address ranges from [RFC
3330] that are not expected to appear as source or destination
addresses on the public Internet and to not have a unique name to
associate with.
+------------------------------+------------------------------+ The recommendation to serve an empty zone 127.IN-ADDR.ARPA is not a
attempt to discourage any practice to provide a PTR RR for
1.0.0.127.IN-ADDR.ARPA locally. In fact, a meaningful reverse
mapping should exist, but the exact setup is out of the scope of this
document. Similar logic applies to the reverse mapping for ::1
Section 4.3. The recommendations made here simply assume no other
coverage for these domains exists.
+------------------------------+------------------------+
| Zone | Description | | Zone | Description |
+------------------------------+------------------------------+ +------------------------------+------------------------+
| 0.IN-ADDR.ARPA | /* IPv4 "THIS" NETWORK */ | | 0.IN-ADDR.ARPA | IPv4 "THIS" NETWORK |
| 127.IN-ADDR.ARPA | /* IPv4 LOOP-BACK NETWORK */ | | 127.IN-ADDR.ARPA | IPv4 LOOP-BACK NETWORK |
| 254.169.IN-ADDR.ARPA | /* IPv4 LINK LOCAL */ | | 254.169.IN-ADDR.ARPA | IPv4 LINK LOCAL |
| 2.0.192.IN-ADDR.ARPA | /* IPv4 TEST NET */ | | 2.0.192.IN-ADDR.ARPA | IPv4 TEST NET |
| 255.255.255.255.IN-ADDR.ARPA | /* IPv4 BROADCAST */ | | 255.255.255.255.IN-ADDR.ARPA | IPv4 BROADCAST |
+------------------------------+------------------------------+ +------------------------------+------------------------+
4.3. Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses 4.3. Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses
See [RFC 4291], Sections 2.4, 2.5.2 and 2.5.3. The reverse mappings ([RFC 3596], Section 2.5 IP6.ARPA Domain) for
the IPv6 Unspecified (::) and Loopback (::1) addresses ([RFC 4291],
Sections 2.4, 2.5.2 and 2.5.3) are covered by these two zones:
0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.IP +-------------------------------------------+
6.ARPA | Zone |
1.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.IP +-------------------------------------------+
6.ARPA | 0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.\ |
| 0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.IP6.ARPA |
| 1.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.\ |
| 0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.IP6.ARPA |
+-------------------------------------------+
Note: Line breaks and a escapes '\' have been inserted above for
readability and to adhere to line width constraints. They are not
parts of the zone names.
4.4. IPv6 Locally Assigned Local Addresses 4.4. IPv6 Locally Assigned Local Addresses
See [RFC 4193]. Section 4.4 of [RFC 4193] already required special treatment of:
D.F.IP6.ARPA +--------------+
| Zone |
+--------------+
| D.F.IP6.ARPA |
+--------------+
4.5. IPv6 Link Local Addresses 4.5. IPv6 Link Local Addresses
See [RFC 4291], Sections 2.4 and 2.5.6. IPv6 Link-Local Addresses as of [RFC 4291], Section 2.5.6 are covered
by four distinct reverse DNS zones:
8.E.F.IP6.ARPA +----------------+
9.E.F.IP6.ARPA | Zone |
A.E.F.IP6.ARPA +----------------+
B.E.F.IP6.ARPA | 8.E.F.IP6.ARPA |
| 9.E.F.IP6.ARPA |
| A.E.F.IP6.ARPA |
| B.E.F.IP6.ARPA |
+----------------+
5. Zones that are Out-Of-Scope 5. Zones that are Out-Of-Scope
IPv6 site-local addresses, [RFC 4291] Sections 2.4 and 2.57, and IPv6 IPv6 site-local addresses, [RFC 4291] Sections 2.4 and 2.57, and IPv6
Centrally Assigned Local [RFC 4193] addresses are not covered here. Centrally Assigned Local [RFC 4193] addresses are not covered here.
It is expected that IPv6 site-local addresses will be self correcting It is expected that IPv6 site-local addresses will be self correcting
as IPv6 implementations remove support for site-local addresses. as IPv6 implementations remove support for site-local addresses.
However, sacrificial servers for C.E.F.IP6.ARPA through However, sacrificial servers for C.E.F.IP6.ARPA through
F.E.F.IP6.ARPA may still need to be deployed in the short term if the F.E.F.IP6.ARPA may still need to be deployed in the short term if the
traffic becomes excessive. traffic becomes excessive.
For IPv6 Centrally Assigned Local addresses (L = 0) [RFC 4193], there For IPv6 Centrally Assigned Local addresses (L = 0) [RFC 4193], there
has been no decision made about whether the registries will provide has been no decision made about whether the Regional Internet
delegations in this space or not. If they don't, then C.F.IP6.ARPA Registries (RIRs) will provide delegations in this space or not. If
will need to be added to the list in Section 4.4. If they do, then they don't, then C.F.IP6.ARPA will need to be added to the list in
registries will need to take steps to ensure that name servers are Section 4.4. If they do, then registries will need to take steps to
provided for these addresses. ensure that name servers are provided for these addresses.
This document also ignores IP6.INT. IP6.INT has been wound up with This document also ignores IP6.INT. IP6.INT has been wound up with
only legacy resolvers now generating reverse queries under IP6.INT. only legacy resolvers now generating reverse queries under IP6.INT
[RFC 4159].
This document has also deliberately ignored names immediately under This document has also deliberately ignored names immediately under
the root. While there is a subset of queries to the roots which the root domain. While there is a subset of queries to the root name
could be addressed using the techniques described here (e.g. .local, servers which could be addressed using the techniques described here
.workgroup and IPv4 addresses), there is also a vast amount of (e.g. .local, .workgroup and IPv4 addresses), there is also a vast
traffic that requires a different strategy (e.g. lookups for amount of traffic that requires a different strategy (e.g. lookups
unqualified hostnames, IPv6 addresses). for unqualified hostnames, IPv6 addresses).
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
This document requests that IANA establish a registry of zones which This document requests that IANA establish a registry of zones which
require this default behaviour. The initial contents of which are in require this default behaviour. The initial contents of which are in
Section 4. Implementors are encouraged to check this registry and Section 4. Implementors are encouraged to check this registry and
adjust their implementations to reflect changes therein. adjust their implementations to reflect changes therein.
This registry can be amended through "IETF Consensus" as per [RFC This registry can be amended through "IETF Consensus" as per [RFC
2434] or IETF Review in 2434bis. 2434].
ICANN should co-ordinate with the RIRs to ensure that DNSSEC IANA should co-ordinate with the RIRs to ensure that, as DNSSEC is
deployment in the reverse trees that these zone are delegated from deployed in the reverse tree, delegations for these zones are made in
happens in the manner described in Section 7. the manner described in Section 7.
7. Security Considerations 7. Security Considerations
During the initial deployment phase, particularly where [RFC 1918] During the initial deployment phase, particularly where [RFC 1918]
addresses are in use, there may be some clients that unexpectedly addresses are in use, there may be some clients that unexpectedly
receive a name error rather than a PTR record. This may cause some receive a name error rather than a PTR record. This may cause some
service disruption until full service resolvers have been re- service disruption until their recursive name server(s) have been re-
configured. configured.
As DNSSEC is deployed within the IN-ADDR.ARPA and IP6.ARPA As DNSSEC is deployed within the IN-ADDR.ARPA and IP6.ARPA
namespaces, the zones listed above will need to be delegated as namespaces, the zones listed above will need to be delegated as
insecure delegations. This will allow DNSSEC validation to succeed insecure delegations, or be within insecure zones. This will allow
for queries in these spaces despite not being answered from the DNSSEC validation to succeed for queries in these spaces despite not
delegated servers. being answered from the delegated servers.
It is recommended that sites actively using these namespaces secure It is recommended that sites actively using these namespaces secure
them using DNSSEC [RFC 4035] by publishing and using DNSSEC trust them using DNSSEC [RFC 4035] by publishing and using DNSSEC trust
anchors. This will protect the clients from accidental leakage of anchors. This will protect the clients from accidental import of
unsigned answers from the Internet. unsigned responses from the Internet.
8. Acknowledgements 8. Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the US National Science Foundation This work was supported by the US National Science Foundation
(research grant SCI-0427144) and DNS-OARC. (research grant SCI-0427144) and DNS-OARC.
9. References 9. References
9.1. Normative References 9.1. Normative References
skipping to change at page 8, line 26 skipping to change at page 9, line 18
[RFC 1918] [RFC 1918]
Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, B., Karrenberg, D., de Groot, G., Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, B., Karrenberg, D., de Groot, G.,
and E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets", and E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets",
RFC 1918, February 1996. RFC 1918, February 1996.
[RFC 2119] [RFC 2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC 2136]
Vixie, P., Thomson, A., Rekhter, Y., and J. Bound,
"Dynamic Updates in the Domain Name System (DNS UPDATE)",
RFC 2136, April 1997.
[RFC 2308] [RFC 2308]
Andrews, M., "Negative Caching of DNS Queries (DNS Andrews, M., "Negative Caching of DNS Queries (DNS
NCACHE)", RFC 2398, March 1998. NCACHE)", RFC 2398, March 1998.
[RFC 2434] [RFC 2434]
Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
October 1998. October 1998.
[RFC 2606] [RFC 2606]
Eastlake, D. and A. Panitz, "Reserved Top Level DNS Eastlake, D. and A. Panitz, "Reserved Top Level DNS
Names", BCP 32, RFC 2606, June 1999. Names", BCP 32, RFC 2606, June 1999.
[RFC 3596]
Thomson, S., Huitema, C., Ksinant, V., and M. Souissi,
"DNS Extensions to Support IPv6", RFC 3596, October 2003.
[RFC 4035] [RFC 4035]
Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
Rose, "Protocol Modifications for the DNS Security Rose, "Protocol Modifications for the DNS Security
Extensions", RFC 4035, March 2005. Extensions", RFC 4035, March 2005.
[RFC 4159]
Huston, G., "Deprecation of "ip6.int"", BCP 109, RFC 4159,
August 2005.
[RFC 4193] [RFC 4193]
Hinden, R. and B. Haberman, "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Hinden, R. and B. Haberman, "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast
Addresses", RFC 4193, October 2005. Addresses", RFC 4193, October 2005.
[RFC 4291] [RFC 4291]
Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006. Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006.
9.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[AS112] "AS112 Project", <http://as112.net/>. [AS112] "AS112 Project", <http://www.as112.net/>.
[I-D.draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-ops]
Abley, J. and W. Maton, "AS112 Nameserver Operations",
draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-ops-00 (work in progress),
February 2007.
[I-D.draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-under-attack-help-help]
Abley, J. and W. Maton, "I'm Being Attacked by
PRISONER.IANA.ORG!",
draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-under-attack-help-help-00 (work in
progress), February 2007.
[RFC 3330] [RFC 3330]
"Special-Use IPv4 Addresses", RFC 3330, September 2002. "Special-Use IPv4 Addresses", RFC 3330, September 2002.
Appendix A. Change History [To Be Removed on Publication] Appendix A. Change History [To Be Removed on Publication]
A.1. draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-02.txt A.1. draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-03.txt
expanded section 4 descriptions
Added references [RFC 2136], [RFC 3596],
[I-D.draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-ops] and
[I-D.draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-under-attack-help-help].
Revised language.
A.2. draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-02.txt
RNAME now "nobody.invalid." RNAME now "nobody.invalid."
Revised language. Revised language.
A.2. draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-01.txt A.3. draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-01.txt
Revised impact description. Revised impact description.
Updated to reflect change in IP6.INT status. Updated to reflect change in IP6.INT status.
A.3. draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-00.txt A.4. draft-ietf-dnsop-default-local-zones-00.txt
Adopted by DNSOP. Adopted by DNSOP.
"Author's Note" re-titled "Zones that are Out-Of-Scope" "Author's Note" re-titled "Zones that are Out-Of-Scope"
Add note that these zone are expected to seed the IANA registry. Add note that these zone are expected to seed the IANA registry.
Title changed. Title changed.
A.4. draft-andrews-full-service-resolvers-03.txt A.5. draft-andrews-full-service-resolvers-03.txt
Added "Proposed Status". Added "Proposed Status".
A.5. draft-andrews-full-service-resolvers-02.txt A.6. draft-andrews-full-service-resolvers-02.txt
Added 0.IN-ADDR.ARPA. Added 0.IN-ADDR.ARPA.
Appendix B. Proposed Status [To Be Removed on Publication] Appendix B. Proposed Status [To Be Removed on Publication]
This Internet-Draft is being submitted for eventual publication as an This Internet-Draft is being submitted for eventual publication as an
RFC with a proposed status of Best Current Practice. RFC with a proposed status of Best Current Practice.
Author's Address Author's Address
 End of changes. 43 change blocks. 
113 lines changed or deleted 194 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.34. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/