draft-ietf-urn-net-procedures-01.txt   draft-ietf-urn-net-procedures-02.txt 
URN Working Group M.Mealling Network Working Group M. Mealling
INTERNET-DRAFT Network Solutions, Inc. Internet-Draft Network Solutions, Inc.
Expires six months from November 1998 Category: Informational February 1999
Intended category: Experimental Expires: August 02, 1999
draft-ietf-urn-net-procedures-01.txt
Assignment Procedures for the URI Resolution using DNS (RFC2168) Assignment Procedures for URI Resolution using DNS
draft-ietf-urn-net-procedures-02.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft. Internet-Drafts are working This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also
distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents
documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet- at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
"work in progress."
To view the entire list of current Internet-Drafts, please check To view the entire list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories, see
the "1id-abstracts.txt" listing contained in the Internet-Drafts http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
Shadow Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), ftp.nordu.net
(Northern Europe), ftp.nic.it (Southern Europe), munnari.oz.au This Internet-Draft will expire on August 02, 1999.
(Pacific Rim), ftp.ietf.org (US East Coast), or ftp.isi.edu
(US West Coast).
Abstract Abstract
RFC2168 defines a DNS resource record and an algorithm for using DNS RFC2168 defines a DNS resource record and an algorithm for using DNS
as a registry for retrieving URI delegation rules (sometimes as a registry for retrieving URI delegation rules (sometimes called
called resolution hints). That document specifies that the first step resolution hints). That document specifies that the first step in
in that algorithm is to append 'uri.net' to the URI scheme and retrieve that algorithm is to append 'uri.net' to the URI scheme and retrieve
the NAPTR record for that domain-name. I.e., the first step in the NAPTR record for that domain-name. I.e., the first step in
resolving "http://foo.com/" would be to look up a NAPTR record for resolving "http://foo.com/" would be to look up a NAPTR record for
the domain "http.uri.net". URN resolution also follows a similar the domain "http.uri.net". URN resolution also follows a similar
procedure but uses the 'urn.net' zone as its root. This document procedure but uses the 'urn.net' zone as its root. This document
describes the procedures for inserting a new rule into the 'uri.net' describes the procedures for inserting a new rule into the 'uri.net'
and 'urn.net' zones. and 'urn.net' zones.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. URI Resolution vs URN Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. URI Registration Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. URN Registration Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. Requirements on rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
6. Submission Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. Registration Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7.1 Key . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7.2 Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7.3 Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. Example Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
9. The URN Registration in the uri.net zone . . . . . . . . . . . 5
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document defines the policies and procedures for inserting This document defines the policies and procedures for inserting
NAPTR records into the 'uri.net' and 'urn.net' zones for the purpose NAPTR records into the 'uri.net' and 'urn.net' zones for the purpose
of resolving URIs according to "Resolution of Uniform Resource of resolving URIs according to "Resolution of Uniform Resource
Identifiers using the Domain Name System", RFCXXXX [1], which is Identifiers using the Domain Name System", RFCXXXX[1], which is an
an application of the NAPTR DNS Resource Record defined in RFCXXXX [2]. application of the NAPTR DNS Resource Record defined in RFCXXXX[2].
2. URI Resolution vs URN Resolution 2. URI Resolution vs URN Resolution
RFCXXXX [1] defines how both URI resolution and URN [4] resolution work. RFCXXXX[1] defines how both URI resolution and URN[3] resolution
Specifically it says that all URIs rules are registered in 'uri.net'. work. Specifically it says that all URIs rules are registered in
Since a URN is a URI it follows the same rules. Thus one of the 'uri.net'. Since a URN is a URI it follows the same rules. Thus one
rules in the 'uri.net' zone is the one for a URN. This rule states that of the rules in the 'uri.net' zone is the one for a URN. This rule
the namespace id [4] is extracted, 'urn.net' is appended to the end states that the namespace id [4] is extracted, 'urn.net' is appended
of the namespace id, and the next NAPTR record [2] is retrieved. to the end of the namespace id, and the next NAPTR record[2] is
retrieved.
Mealling [Page 1]
3. URI Registration Procedure 3. URI Registration Procedure
At this time there is no set procedure for registering new URI schemes At this time there is no set procedure for registering new URI
other than a published RFC. Due to this lack and the existence of schemes other than a published RFC. Due to this lack and the
non-published schemes such as "about" and "res", there is an IETF existence of non-published schemes such as "about" and "res", there
working group discussing how to deal with this problem. Thus, at is an IETF working group discussing how to deal with this problem.
this time the only requirements for requesting an entry in the uri.net Thus, at this time the only requirements for requesting an entry in
zone is that the URI scheme be published or in use somewhere and that the uri.net zone is that the URI scheme be published or in use
it not conflict with an existing URI scheme. somewhere and that it not conflict with an existing URI scheme.
When the IETF does standardize a set of procedures for vetting and When the IETF does standardize a set of procedures for vetting and
registering new URI schemes, the 'uri.net' registration procedures MUST registering new URI schemes, the 'uri.net' registration procedures
adhere to those procedures for determining if the URI scheme in question MUST adhere to those procedures for determining if the URI scheme in
is valid. question is valid.
3. URN Registration Procedure 4. URN Registration Procedure
RFCXXXX [7] defines the procedures for assignment of new URN RFCXXXX[6] defines the procedures for assignment of new URN
namespace-ids. Since the 'urn.net' registration procedures only deal namespace-ids. Since the 'urn.net' registration procedures only
with the namespace-id portion of the URN space, that document is the deal with the namespace-id portion of the URN space, that document
sole determining document for what can be entered into the urn.net zone is the sole determining document for what can be entered into the
for a URN. urn.net zone for a URN.
4. Requirements on rules 5. Requirements on rules
Delegation of a namespace can happen in two ways. In the case of most Delegation of a namespace can happen in two ways. In the case of
URIs where the entity being delegated to is hard-coded into the most URIs where the entity being delegated to is hard-coded into the
identifier itself, the syntax of where this is located is set. identifier itself, the syntax of where this is located is set. In
In the case where the entity being delegated to is set in the rule, the case where the entity being delegated to is set in the rule,
that entity can change as the rule changes. that entity can change as the rule changes.
One of the optimizations that the both the URI and URN registries One of the optimizations that the both the URI and URN registries
attempts to make is that any entry in that zone should have an attempts to make is that any entry in that zone should have an
extremely long time to live. 'Extremely long' should be measured in extremely long time to live. 'Extremely long' should be measured in
years if possible. Thus, any rule that can change must be delegated years if possible. Thus, any rule that can change must be delegated
out of the urn.net zone by a replacement rule in the NAPTR record. out of the urn.net zone by a replacement rule in the NAPTR record.
For example, the 'foo' URN namespace has flexible rules for how For example, the 'foo' URN namespace has flexible rules for how
delegation takes place. Instead of putting those rules in the delegation takes place. Instead of putting those rules in the
urn.net zone, the entry instead punts those rules off to a nameserver urn.net zone, the entry instead punts those rules off to a
that has a shorter time to live. The record in urn.net would look nameserver that has a shorter time to live. The record in urn.net
like this: would look like this:
foo IN NAPTR 100 10 "" "" "" urn-resolver.foo.com. foo IN NAPTR 100 10 "" "" "" urn-resolver.foo.com.
Thus, when the client starts out in the resolution process, the second Thus, when the client starts out in the resolution process, the
step is to begin asking 'urn-resolver.foo.com' for the NAPTR records second step is to begin asking 'urn-resolver.foo.com' for the NAPTR
that contain the resolution rules. The TTL at the root is very long. records that contain the resolution rules. The TTL at the root is
The TTL at the 'urn-resolver.foo.com' is much shorter. very long. The TTL at the 'urn-resolver.foo.com' is much shorter.
Conversely, the 'http' URL scheme adheres to a particular syntax that Conversely, the 'http' URL scheme adheres to a particular syntax
specifies that the host to ask is specified in the URL in question. that specifies that the host to ask is specified in the URL in
Since this syntax does not change, that rule can be specified in the question. Since this syntax does not change, that rule can be
uri.net zone. The record would look like this: specified in the uri.net zone. The record would look like this:
http IN NAPTR 100 100 "" "" "/http:\\/\\/([^\\/:]+)/\\2/i" . http IN NAPTR 100 100 "" "" "/http:\\/\\/([^\\/:]+)/\\2/i" .
Mealling [Page 2]
Thus, the second step of resolution is to attempt to contact the Thus, the second step of resolution is to attempt to contact the
host contained in the URL itself. host contained in the URL itself.
5. Submission Procedure 6. Submission Procedure
Using the MIME Content-Type registration mechanism [6] as a Using the MIME Content-Type registration mechanism[5]as a model for
model for a successful registration mechanism, the 'uri.net' and a successful registration mechanism, the 'uri.net' and 'urn.net'
'urn.net' procedures consist of a request template submitted to an procedures consist of a request template submitted to an open
open mailing list made up of interested parties. If no objections mailing list made up of interested parties. If no objections are
are made within a two week period, a representative of the registration made within a two week period, a representative of the registration
authority considers the submission to be accepted and enters authority considers the submission to be accepted and enters that
that submission into the nameserver. submission into the nameserver.
Registrations for the 'uri.net' zone are sent to 'register@uri.net'. o Registrations for the 'uri.net' zone are sent to
Registrations for the 'urn.net' zone are sent to 'register@urn.net'. 'register@uri.net'.
o Registrations for the 'urn.net' zone are sent to
'register@urn.net'.
At this time the registration authority is expected to be the IANA. At this time the registration authority is expected to be the IANA.
Objections are restricted to those that point out impacts on Objections are restricted to those that point out impacts on the
the zone itself or to DNS in general. Objections to the URL zone itself or to DNS in general. Objections to the URL scheme or to
scheme or to the URN namespace-id are not allowed, as these should the URN namespace-id are not allowed, as these should be raised in
be raised in their respective forums. The logical conclusion of their respective forums. The logical conclusion of this is that ANY
this is that ANY sanctioned URL scheme or URN namespace MUST sanctioned URL scheme or URN namespace MUST be allowed to be
be allowed to be registered if it meets the requirements specified registered if it meets the requirements specified in this document
in this document as regards times to live and general impact as regards times to live and general impact to the DNS.
to the DNS.
6. Registration Template 7. Registration Template
The template to be sent to the appropriate list MUST contain the The template to be sent to the appropriate list MUST contain the
following values: following values:
6.2 Key 7.1 Key
This is the domain portion. It must be valid according to the This is the URN NID or URL scheme, which is used as the domain
procedures specified in the URN namespace-id assignment document portion of the DNS entry. It must be valid according to the
and any future standards for registering new URL schemes. procedures specified in the URN namespace-id assignment document and
any future standards for registering new URL schemes.
6.3 Authority 7.2 Authority
This is the authority doing the registration of the record. It must This is the authority doing the registration of the record. It must
be an authority recognized as either the IESG or an authority be an authority recognized as either the IESG or any authority
specified in the documents submitted for approval by any URN or URL defined in the URN NID[6] or URL scheme registration[7] documents.
registration mechanism.
6.4 Records
One or more records representing the rule set for the key. The required 7.3 Records
values are Preference, Order, Flags, Services, Regex, and Replacement
as defined by RFC2168.
Mealling [Page 3] The actual DNS records representing the rule set for the key. The
required values are Preference, Order, Flags, Services, Regex, and
Replacement as defined by RFCXXXX[2].
7. Example Template 8. Example Template
To: register@urn.net To: register@urn.net
From: joe@foo.com From: joe@foo.com
Key: foo Key: foo
Authority: Foo Technology, Inc as specified in RFCFOO Authority: Foo Technology, Inc as specified in RFCFOO
Record: foo IN NAPTR 100 100 "" "" "" urn.foo.com. Record: foo IN NAPTR 100 100 "" "" "" urn.foo.com.
8. The URN Registration in the uri.net zone 9. The URN Registration in the uri.net zone
Since this document discusses the uri.net and urn.net zones and the Since this document discusses the uri.net and urn.net zones and the
URN rule that exists in the uri.net zone, it makes sense for the URN rule that exists in the uri.net zone, it makes sense for the
regisration template for the URN URI rule to be specified here: regisration template for the URN URI rule to be specified here:
To: register@uri.net To: register@uri.net
From: The IETF URN Working Group From: The IETF URN Working Group
Key: urn Key: urn
Authority: RFC2141 Authority: RFC2141
Record: urn IN NAPTR 0 0 "" "" "/urn:([^:]+)/\\2/i" . Record: urn IN NAPTR 0 0 "" "" "/urn:([^:]+)/\\2/i" .
8. IANA Considerations 10. IANA Considerations
This document describes a mechanism for registering representations of This document describes a mechanism for registering representations
protocol items that have already been registered with some IETF of protocol items that have already been registered with some IETF
sanctioned agency (probably the IANA as well). This means that the IANA sanctioned agency (probably the IANA as well). This means that the
need not determine appropriateness of the underlying namespaces, IANA need not determine appropriateness of the underlying
since that is determined by another process. namespaces, since that is determined by another process.
The only real impact on the IANA will be The only real impact on the IANA will be
to maintain (or designate some other entity to maintain) a primary o to maintain (or designate some other entity to maintain) a
nameserver for the uri.net and urn.net zones; primary nameserver for the uri.net and urn.net zones;
o to maintain the mailing lists "register@uri.net" and
to maintain the mailing lists "register@uri.net" and "register@uri.net" as the forum for discussions of submissions;
"register@uri.net" as the forum for discussions of submissions; and and
o to act as the party that determines if all objections have been
to act as the party that determines if all objections have been
noted and accommodated. noted and accommodated.
Mealling [Page 4] References
7. References
[1] M. Mealling, R. Daniel, "Resolution of Uniform [1] Mealling, M., Daniel, R., "Resolution of Uniform Resource
Resource Identifiers using the Domain Name System", Identifiers using the Domain Name System", November 1998.
<draft-ietf-urn-dns-rds-00.txt>. November 1998.
[2] M. Mealling, R. Daniel, "The Naming Authority Pointer (NAPTR) [2] Mealling, M., Daniel, R., "The Naming Authority Pointer (NAPTR)
DNS Resource Record". <draft-ietf-urn-naptr-rr-00.txt>. DNS Resource Record", November 1998.
November 1998.
[3] K. Sollins, "Architectural Principles of Uniform Resource [3] Moats, R., "URN Syntax", RFC 2141, May 1997.
Name Resolution", RFC 2276, January 1998.
[4] Ryan Moats, "URN Syntax", RFC 2141, May 1997. [4] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., Masinter, L., "Uniform Resource
Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396, August 1998.
[5] T. Berners-Lee, R. Fielding, L. Masinter. "Uniform [5] Freed, N., Klensin, J., Postel, J., "Multipurpose Internet Mail
Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396, Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures", RFC
August 1998. 2048, November 1996.
[6] N. Freed, J. Klensin, J. Postel, "Multipurpose Internet [6] Faltstrom, P., Iannella, R., Daigle, L., van Gulik, D., "URN
Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures", Namespace Definition Mechanisms", October 1998.
RFC 2048, November 1996.
[7] P. Faltstrom, R. Iannella, L. Daigle, D. van Gulik, "URN [7] Petke, R., King, I., "Registration Procedures for URL Scheme
Namespace Definition Mechanisms", 10/26/1998, Names", January 1999.
<draft-ietf-urn-nid-req-07.txt>
8. Author Contact Information Author's Address
Michael Mealling Michael Mealling
Network Solutions Network Solutions, Inc.
505 Huntmar Park Drive 505 Huntmar Park Drive
Herndon, VA 22070 Herndon, VA 22070
voice: (703) 742-0400 US
fax: (703) 742-9552
email: michaelm@rwhois.net
Mealling [Page 5] Phone: +1 770 935 5492
EMail: michaelm@netsol.com
URI: http://www.netsol.com
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implmentation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph
are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
 End of changes. 47 change blocks. 
141 lines changed or deleted 150 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/