new draft
This commit is contained in:
673
doc/draft/draft-yao-dnsext-bname-02.txt
Normal file
673
doc/draft/draft-yao-dnsext-bname-02.txt
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,673 @@
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Network Working Group J. Yao
|
||||
Internet-Draft X. Lee
|
||||
Intended status: Standards Track CNNIC
|
||||
Expires: December 14, 2010 P. Vixie
|
||||
Internet Software Consortium
|
||||
June 15, 2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Bundle DNS Name Redirection
|
||||
draft-yao-dnsext-bname-02.txt
|
||||
|
||||
Abstract
|
||||
|
||||
This document defines a new DNS Resource Record called "BNAME", which
|
||||
provides the capability to map itself and its subtree of the DNS name
|
||||
space to another domain. It differs from the CNAME record which only
|
||||
maps a single node of the DNS name space, from the DNAME which only
|
||||
maps the subtree of the DNS name space to another domain.
|
||||
|
||||
Status of this Memo
|
||||
|
||||
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
|
||||
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
|
||||
|
||||
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
|
||||
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
|
||||
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
|
||||
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
|
||||
|
||||
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
|
||||
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
|
||||
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
|
||||
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
|
||||
|
||||
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 14, 2010.
|
||||
|
||||
Copyright Notice
|
||||
|
||||
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
|
||||
document authors. All rights reserved.
|
||||
|
||||
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
|
||||
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
|
||||
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
|
||||
publication of this document. Please review these documents
|
||||
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
|
||||
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
|
||||
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Yao, et al. Expires December 14, 2010 [Page 1]
|
||||
|
||||
Internet-Draft bname June 2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
|
||||
described in the Simplified BSD License.
|
||||
|
||||
This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
|
||||
Contributions published or made publicly available before November
|
||||
10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
|
||||
material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
|
||||
modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
|
||||
Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
|
||||
the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
|
||||
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
|
||||
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
|
||||
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
|
||||
than English.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Table of Contents
|
||||
|
||||
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
|
||||
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
|
||||
2. Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
|
||||
3. The BNAME Resource Record . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
|
||||
3.1. Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
|
||||
3.2. The BNAME Substitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
|
||||
3.3. The BNAME Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
|
||||
4. Query Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
|
||||
4.1. Processing by Servers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
|
||||
4.2. Processing by Resolvers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
|
||||
5. BNAME in DNSSEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
|
||||
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
|
||||
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
|
||||
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
|
||||
9. Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
|
||||
9.1. draft-yao-dnsext-bname: Version 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
|
||||
9.2. draft-yao-dnsext-bname: Version 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
|
||||
9.3. draft-yao-dnsext-bname: Version 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
|
||||
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
|
||||
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
|
||||
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
|
||||
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Yao, et al. Expires December 14, 2010 [Page 2]
|
||||
|
||||
Internet-Draft bname June 2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
1. Introduction
|
||||
|
||||
More and more internationalized domain name labels [RFC3490] appear
|
||||
in the DNS trees. Some labels [RFC3743] are equivalent in some
|
||||
languages. The internet users want them to be identical in the DNS
|
||||
resolution. For example, color.exmaple.com==colour.example.com. The
|
||||
BNAME represents for bundle names. This document defines a new DNS
|
||||
Resource Record called "BNAME", which provides the capability to map
|
||||
an entire tree of the DNS name space to another domain. It means
|
||||
that the BNAME redirects both itself and its descendants to its
|
||||
owner. The DNAME [RFC2672] and [RFC2672bis] do not redirect itself,
|
||||
only the descendants. The domain name that owns a DNAME record is
|
||||
allowed to have other resource record types at that domain name. The
|
||||
domain name that owns a BNAME record is not allowed to have other
|
||||
resource record types at that domain name unless they are the DNSSEC
|
||||
related resource record types defined in [RFC4033], [RFC4034],
|
||||
[RFC4035] and [RFC5155]. A server MAY refuse to load a zone that has
|
||||
data at a sub-domain of a domain name owning a BNAME RR or that has
|
||||
other data except the DNSSEC related resource record types and BNAME
|
||||
at that name. BNAME is a singleton type, meaning only one BNAME is
|
||||
allowed per name except the DNSSEC related resource record types.
|
||||
Resolvers, servers and zone content administrators should be cautious
|
||||
that usage of BNAME or its combination with CNAME or DNAME may lead
|
||||
to form loops. The loops should be avoided.
|
||||
|
||||
1.1. Terminology
|
||||
|
||||
All the basic terms used in this specification are defined in the
|
||||
documents [RFC1034], [RFC1035] and [RFC2672].
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
2. Motivation
|
||||
|
||||
In some languages, some characters have the variants, which look
|
||||
differently or very similar but are identical in the meaning. For
|
||||
example, Chinese character U+56FD and its variant U+570B look
|
||||
differently, but are identical in the meaning. If Internationalized
|
||||
Domain Label" or "IDL" [RFC3743] are composed of variant characters,
|
||||
we regard this kind of IDL as the IDL variant. If these IDL variants
|
||||
are put into the DNS for resolution, they are expected to be
|
||||
identical in the DNS resolution. More comprehensible example is that
|
||||
we expect color.exmaple.com to be equivalent with the
|
||||
colour.exmaple.com in the DNS resolution. The BNAME Resource Record
|
||||
and its processing rules are conceived as a solution to this
|
||||
equivalence problem. Without the BNAME mechanism, current mechanisms
|
||||
such as DNAME or CNAME are not enough capable to solve all the
|
||||
problems with the emergence of internationalized domain names. The
|
||||
internationalized domain names may have alias or equivalence of the
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Yao, et al. Expires December 14, 2010 [Page 3]
|
||||
|
||||
Internet-Draft bname June 2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
original one. The BNAME solution provides the solution to both ASCII
|
||||
alias names and internationalized domain alias names.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
3. The BNAME Resource Record
|
||||
|
||||
3.1. Format
|
||||
|
||||
The BNAME RR has mnemonic BNAME and type code xx (decimal). It is
|
||||
not class-sensitive. Its RDATA is comprised of a single field,
|
||||
<target>, which contains a fully qualified domain name that must be
|
||||
sent in uncompressed form [RFC1035], [RFC3597]. The <target> field
|
||||
MUST be present. The presentation format of <target> is that of a
|
||||
domain name [RFC1035]. The wildcards in the BNAME RR SHOULD NOT be
|
||||
used.
|
||||
|
||||
<owner> <ttl> <class> BNAME <target>
|
||||
|
||||
The effect of the BNAME RR is the substitution of the record's
|
||||
<target> for its owner name, as a suffix of a domain name. This
|
||||
substitution has to be applied for every BNAME RR found in the
|
||||
resolution process, which allows fairly lengthy valid chains of BNAME
|
||||
RRs.
|
||||
|
||||
3.2. The BNAME Substitution
|
||||
|
||||
A BNAME substitution is performed by replacing the suffix labels of
|
||||
the name being sought matching the owner name of the BNAME resource
|
||||
record with the string of labels in the RDATA field. The matching
|
||||
labels end with the root label in all cases. Only whole labels are
|
||||
replaced.
|
||||
|
||||
3.3. The BNAME Rules
|
||||
|
||||
There are two rules which governs the use of BNAMEs in a zone file.
|
||||
The first one is that there SHOULD be no descendants under the owner
|
||||
of the BNAME. The second one is that no resource records can co-
|
||||
exist with the BNAME for the same name except the DNSSEC related
|
||||
resource record types. It means that if a BNAME RR is present at a
|
||||
node N, there MUST be no other data except the DNSSEC related
|
||||
resource record types at N and no data at any descendant of N. This
|
||||
restriction applies only to records of the same class as the BNAME
|
||||
record.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
4. Query Processing
|
||||
|
||||
To exploit the BNAME mechanism the name resolution algorithms
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Yao, et al. Expires December 14, 2010 [Page 4]
|
||||
|
||||
Internet-Draft bname June 2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC1034] must be modified slightly for both servers and resolvers.
|
||||
Both modified algorithms incorporate the operation of making a
|
||||
substitution on a name (either QNAME or SNAME) under control of a
|
||||
BNAME record. This operation will be referred to as "the BNAME
|
||||
substitution".
|
||||
|
||||
4.1. Processing by Servers
|
||||
|
||||
For a server performing non-recursive service steps 3.a, 3.c and 4 of
|
||||
section 4.3.2 [RFC1034] are changed to check for a BNAME record, and
|
||||
to return certain BNAME records from zone data and the cache. When
|
||||
preparing a response, a server performing a BNAME substitution will
|
||||
in all cases include the relevant BNAME RR in the answer section. A
|
||||
CNAME RR is synthesized and included in the answer section. This
|
||||
will help the client to reach the correct DNS data. The provided
|
||||
synthesized CNAME RR, MUST have
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
The same CLASS as the QCLASS of the query,
|
||||
|
||||
TTL equal to the corresponding BNAME RR,
|
||||
|
||||
An <owner> equal to the QNAME in effect at the moment the BNAME RR
|
||||
was encountered, and
|
||||
|
||||
An RDATA field containing the new QNAME formed by the action of
|
||||
the BNAME substitution.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
The revised server algorithm is:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
1. Set or clear the value of recursion available in the response
|
||||
depending on whether the name server is willing to provide
|
||||
recursive service. If recursive service is available and
|
||||
requested via the RD bit in the query, go to step 5, otherwise
|
||||
step 2.
|
||||
|
||||
2. Search the available zones for the zone which is the nearest
|
||||
ancestor to QNAME. If such a zone is found, go to step 3,
|
||||
otherwise step 4.
|
||||
|
||||
3. Start matching down, label by label, in the zone. The matching
|
||||
process can terminate several ways:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Yao, et al. Expires December 14, 2010 [Page 5]
|
||||
|
||||
Internet-Draft bname June 2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
a. If the whole of QNAME is matched, we have found the node.
|
||||
|
||||
If the data at the node is a CNAME, and QTYPE doesn't match
|
||||
CNAME, copy the CNAME RR into the answer section of the
|
||||
response, change QNAME to the canonical name in the CNAME RR,
|
||||
and go back to step 1.
|
||||
|
||||
If the data at the node is a BNAME, and QTYPE doesn't
|
||||
match BNAME, copy the BNAME RR and also a corresponding,
|
||||
synthesized CNAME RR into the answer section of the
|
||||
response, change QNAME to the name carried as RDATA in
|
||||
the BNAME RR, and go back to step 1.
|
||||
|
||||
Otherwise, copy all RRs which match QTYPE into the answer
|
||||
section and go to step 6.
|
||||
|
||||
b. If a match would take us out of the authoritative data, we have
|
||||
a referral. This happens when we encounter a node with NS RRs
|
||||
marking cuts along the bottom of a zone.
|
||||
|
||||
Copy the NS RRs for the subzone into the authority section of
|
||||
the reply. Put whatever addresses are available into the
|
||||
additional section, using glue RRs if the addresses are not
|
||||
available from authoritative data or the cache. Go to step 4.
|
||||
|
||||
c. If at some label, a match is impossible (i.e., the
|
||||
corresponding label does not exist), look to see whether the
|
||||
last label matched has a BNAME record.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
If a BNAME record exists at that point, copy that record into
|
||||
the answer section. If substitution of its <target> for its
|
||||
<owner> in QNAME would overflow the legal size for a <domain-
|
||||
name>, set RCODE to YXDOMAIN [RFC2136] and exit; otherwise
|
||||
perform the substitution and continue. The server SHOULD
|
||||
synthesize a corresponding CNAME record as described above and
|
||||
include it in the answer section. Go back to step 1.
|
||||
|
||||
If there was no BNAME record, look to see if the "*" label
|
||||
exists.
|
||||
|
||||
If the "*" label does not exist, check whether the name we are
|
||||
looking for is the original QNAME in the query or a name we
|
||||
have followed due to a CNAME. If the name is original, set an
|
||||
authoritative name error in the response and exit. Otherwise
|
||||
just exit.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Yao, et al. Expires December 14, 2010 [Page 6]
|
||||
|
||||
Internet-Draft bname June 2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
If the "*" label does exist, match RRs at that node against
|
||||
QTYPE. If any match, copy them into the answer section, but
|
||||
set the owner of the RR to be QNAME, and not the node with the
|
||||
"*" label. Go to step 6.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
4. Start matching down in the cache. If QNAME is found in the cache,
|
||||
copy all RRs attached to it that match QTYPE into the answer
|
||||
section. If QNAME is not found in the cache but a BNAME record is
|
||||
present at QNAME, copy that BNAME record into the
|
||||
answer section. If there was no delegation from authoritative
|
||||
data, look for the best one from the cache, and put it in the
|
||||
authority section. Go to step 6.
|
||||
|
||||
5. Use the local resolver or a copy of its algorithm (see resolver
|
||||
section of this memo) to answer the query. Store the results,
|
||||
including any intermediate CNAMEs and BNAMEs, in the answer
|
||||
section of the response.
|
||||
|
||||
6. Using local data only, attempt to add other RRs which may be
|
||||
useful to the additional section of the query. Exit.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Note that there will be at most one ancestor with a BNAME as
|
||||
described in step 4 unless some zone's data is in violation of the
|
||||
no-descendants limitation in section 3. An implementation might take
|
||||
advantage of this limitation by stopping the search of step 3c or
|
||||
step 4 when a BNAME record is encountered.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
4.2. Processing by Resolvers
|
||||
|
||||
A resolver or a server providing recursive service must be modified
|
||||
to treat a BNAME as somewhat analogous to a CNAME. The resolver
|
||||
algorithm of [RFC1034] section 5.3.3 is modified to renumber step 4.d
|
||||
as 4.e and insert a new 4.d. The complete algorithm becomes:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Yao, et al. Expires December 14, 2010 [Page 7]
|
||||
|
||||
Internet-Draft bname June 2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
1. See if the answer is in local information, and if so return it to
|
||||
the client.
|
||||
|
||||
2. Find the best servers to ask.
|
||||
|
||||
3. Send them queries until one returns a response.
|
||||
|
||||
4. Analyze the response, either:
|
||||
|
||||
a. if the response answers the question or contains a name error,
|
||||
cache the data as well as returning it back to the client.
|
||||
|
||||
b. if the response contains a better delegation to other servers,
|
||||
cache the delegation information, and go to step 2.
|
||||
|
||||
c. if the response shows a CNAME and that is not the answer
|
||||
itself, cache the CNAME, change the SNAME to the canonical name
|
||||
in the CNAME RR and go to step 1.
|
||||
|
||||
d. if the response shows a BNAME and that is not the answer
|
||||
itself, cache the BNAME. If substitution of the BNAME's
|
||||
<target> for its <owner> in the SNAME would overflow the legal
|
||||
size for a <domain-name>, return an implementation-dependent
|
||||
error to the application; otherwise perform the substitution
|
||||
and go to step 1.
|
||||
|
||||
e. if the response shows a server failure or other bizarre
|
||||
contents, delete the server from the SLIST and go back to step
|
||||
3.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
A resolver or recursive server which understands BNAME records but
|
||||
sends non-extended queries MUST augment step 4.c by deleting from the
|
||||
reply any CNAME records which have an <owner> which is a subdomain of
|
||||
the <owner> of any BNAME record in the response.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
5. BNAME in DNSSEC
|
||||
|
||||
With the deployment of DNSSEC, more and more servers and resolvers
|
||||
will support DNSSEC. In order to make BNAME valid in DNSSEC
|
||||
verification, the DNSSEC enabled resolvers and servers MUST support
|
||||
BNAME. The synthesized CNAME in the answer section for the BNAME
|
||||
will never be signed. DNSSEC validators MUST understand BNAME,
|
||||
verify the BNAME and then checking that the CNAME was properly
|
||||
synthesized in order to verify the synthesized CNAME. In any
|
||||
negative response, the NSEC or NSEC3 [RFC5155] record type bit map
|
||||
SHOULD be checked to see that there was no BNAME that could have been
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Yao, et al. Expires December 14, 2010 [Page 8]
|
||||
|
||||
Internet-Draft bname June 2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
applied. If the BNAME bit in the type bit map is set and the query
|
||||
type is not BNAME, then BNAME substitution should have been done.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
6. IANA Considerations
|
||||
|
||||
IANA is requested to assignment the number to XX.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
7. Security Considerations
|
||||
|
||||
Both ASCII domain name labels and non-ASCII ones have some aliases.
|
||||
We can bundle the domain name labels and their aliases through BNAME
|
||||
in the DNS resolutions. The name labels and their aliases in the
|
||||
particular languages are only known by those who know these
|
||||
languages. Those labels may be regarded as different ones by those
|
||||
who don't know those languages. Those who do not know the aliases
|
||||
should only use the familar ones. The applications will not know the
|
||||
aliases unless they are properly configured.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
8. Acknowledgements
|
||||
|
||||
Because the BNAME is very similar to DNAME, the authors learn a lot
|
||||
from [RFC2672]. Many ideas are from the discussion in the DNSOP and
|
||||
DNSEXT mailling list. Thanks a lot to all in the list. Many
|
||||
important comments and suggestions are contributed by many members of
|
||||
the DNSEXT and DNSOP WGs. The authors especially thanks the
|
||||
following ones:Niall O'Reilly, Glen Zorn for improving this document.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
9. Change History
|
||||
|
||||
[[anchor14: RFC Editor: Please remove this section.]]
|
||||
|
||||
9.1. draft-yao-dnsext-bname: Version 00
|
||||
|
||||
o Bundle DNS Name Redirection
|
||||
|
||||
9.2. draft-yao-dnsext-bname: Version 01
|
||||
|
||||
o Improve the algorithm
|
||||
o Improve the text
|
||||
|
||||
9.3. draft-yao-dnsext-bname: Version 02
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Yao, et al. Expires December 14, 2010 [Page 9]
|
||||
|
||||
Internet-Draft bname June 2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
o Add the DNSSEC discussion
|
||||
o Improve the text
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
10. References
|
||||
|
||||
10.1. Normative References
|
||||
|
||||
[ASCII] American National Standards Institute (formerly United
|
||||
States of America Standards Institute), "USA Code for
|
||||
Information Interchange", ANSI X3.4-1968, 1968.
|
||||
|
||||
[EDNS0] Vixie, P., "Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0)",
|
||||
RFC 2671, August 1999.
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities",
|
||||
STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987.
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
|
||||
specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
|
||||
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC2136] Vixie, P., Thomson, S., Rekhter, Y., and J. Bound,
|
||||
"Dynamic Updates in the Domain Name System (DNS UPDATE)",
|
||||
RFC 2136, April 1997.
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC2671] Vixie, P., "Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0)",
|
||||
RFC 2671, August 1999.
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC2672] Crawford, M., "Non-Terminal DNS Name Redirection",
|
||||
RFC 2672, August 1999.
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC3490] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello,
|
||||
"Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)",
|
||||
RFC 3490, March 2003.
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC3597] Gustafsson, A., "Handling of Unknown DNS Resource Record
|
||||
(RR) Types", RFC 3597, September 2003.
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC3629] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO
|
||||
10646", RFC 3629, November 2003.
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC3743] Konishi, K., Huang, K., Qian, H., and Y. Ko, "Joint
|
||||
Engineering Team (JET) Guidelines for Internationalized
|
||||
Domain Names (IDN) Registration and Administration for
|
||||
Chinese, Japanese, and Korean", RFC 3743, April 2004.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Yao, et al. Expires December 14, 2010 [Page 10]
|
||||
|
||||
Internet-Draft bname June 2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC4033] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
|
||||
Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements",
|
||||
RFC 4033, March 2005.
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC4034] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
|
||||
Rose, "Resource Records for the DNS Security Extensions",
|
||||
RFC 4034, March 2005.
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC4035] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
|
||||
Rose, "Protocol Modifications for the DNS Security
|
||||
Extensions", RFC 4035, March 2005.
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC5155] Laurie, B., Sisson, G., Arends, R., and D. Blacka, "DNS
|
||||
Security (DNSSEC) Hashed Authenticated Denial of
|
||||
Existence", RFC 5155, March 2008.
|
||||
|
||||
10.2. Informative References
|
||||
|
||||
[RFC2672bis]
|
||||
Rose, S. and W. Wijngaards, "Update to DNAME Redirection
|
||||
in the DNS", Internet-Draft ietf-dnsext-rfc2672bis-dname-
|
||||
17.txt, 6 2009.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Authors' Addresses
|
||||
|
||||
Jiankang YAO
|
||||
CNNIC
|
||||
No.4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun
|
||||
Beijing
|
||||
|
||||
Phone: +86 10 58813007
|
||||
Email: yaojk@cnnic.cn
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Xiaodong LEE
|
||||
CNNIC
|
||||
No.4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun
|
||||
Beijing
|
||||
|
||||
Phone: +86 10 58813020
|
||||
Email: lee@cnnic.cn
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Yao, et al. Expires December 14, 2010 [Page 11]
|
||||
|
||||
Internet-Draft bname June 2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Paul Vixie
|
||||
Internet Software Consortium
|
||||
950 Charter Street
|
||||
Redwood City, CA
|
||||
|
||||
Phone: +1 650 779 7001
|
||||
Email: vixie@isc.org
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Yao, et al. Expires December 14, 2010 [Page 12]
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user