own CVS tree will help minimize CVS conflicts. Maybe not. Blame Graff for getting me to trim all trailing whitespace.
338 lines
11 KiB
Plaintext
338 lines
11 KiB
Plaintext
DNSIND Working Group Matt Crawford
|
||
Internet Draft Fermilab
|
||
May 5, 1999
|
||
|
||
Binary Labels in the Domain Name System
|
||
<draft-ietf-dnsind-binary-labels-05.txt>
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Status of this Memo
|
||
|
||
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
|
||
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. 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
|
||
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."
|
||
|
||
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
|
||
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
|
||
|
||
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
|
||
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
1. Introduction and Terminology
|
||
|
||
This document defines a ``Bit-String Label'' which may appear within
|
||
domain names. This new label type compactly represents a sequence
|
||
of ``One-Bit Labels'' and enables resource records to be stored at
|
||
any bit-boundary in a binary-named section of the domain name tree.
|
||
|
||
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
|
||
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
|
||
document are to be interpreted as described in [KWORD].
|
||
|
||
|
||
2. Motivation
|
||
|
||
Binary labels are intended to efficiently solve the problem of
|
||
storing data and delegating authority on arbitrary boundaries when
|
||
the structure of underlying name space is most naturally represented
|
||
in binary.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Expires November 10, 1999 Crawford [Page 1]
|
||
|
||
Internet Draft Binary DNS Labels May 5, 1999
|
||
|
||
|
||
3. Label Format
|
||
|
||
Up to 256 One-Bit Labels can be grouped into a single Bit-String
|
||
Label. Within a Bit-String Label the most significant or "highest
|
||
level" bit appears first. This is unlike the ordering of DNS labels
|
||
themselves, which has the least significant or "lowest level" label
|
||
first. Nonetheless, this ordering seems to be the most natural and
|
||
efficient for representing binary labels.
|
||
|
||
Among consecutive Bit-String Labels, the bits in the first-appearing
|
||
label are less significant or "at a lower level" than the bits in
|
||
subsequent Bit-String Labels, just as ASCII labels are ordered.
|
||
|
||
|
||
3.1. Encoding
|
||
|
||
|
||
0 1 2
|
||
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 . . .
|
||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-//+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|
||
|0 1| ELT | Count | Label ... |
|
||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+//-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|
||
|
||
(Each tic mark represents one bit.)
|
||
|
||
|
||
ELT 000001 binary, the six-bit extended label type [EDNS0]
|
||
assigned to the Bit-String Label.
|
||
|
||
Count The number of significant bits in the Label field. A
|
||
Count value of zero indicates that 256 bits are
|
||
significant. (Thus the null label representing the DNS
|
||
root cannot be represented as a Bit String Label.)
|
||
|
||
Label The bit string representing a sequence of One-Bit Labels,
|
||
with the most significant bit first. That is, the One-Bit
|
||
Label in position 17 in the diagram above represents a
|
||
subdomain of the domain represented by the One-Bit Label
|
||
in position 16, and so on.
|
||
|
||
The Label field is padded on the right with zero to seven
|
||
pad bits to make the entire field occupy an integral
|
||
number of octets. These pad bits MUST be zero on
|
||
transmission and ignored on reception.
|
||
|
||
A sequence of bits may be split into two or more Bit-String Labels,
|
||
but the division points have no significance and need not be
|
||
preserved. An excessively clever server implementation might split
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Expires November 10, 1999 Crawford [Page 2]
|
||
|
||
Internet Draft Binary DNS Labels May 5, 1999
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bit-String Labels so as to maximize the effectiveness of message
|
||
compression [DNSIS]. A simpler server might divide Bit-String
|
||
Labels at zone boundaries, if any zone boundaries happen to fall
|
||
between One-Bit Labels.
|
||
|
||
|
||
3.2. Textual Representation
|
||
|
||
A Bit-String Label is represented in text -- in a zone file, for
|
||
example -- as a <bit-spec> surrounded by the delimiters "\[" and
|
||
"]". The <bit-spec> is either a dotted quad or a base indicator and
|
||
a sequence of digits appropriate to that base, optionally followed
|
||
by a slash and a length. The base indicators are "b", "o" and "x",
|
||
denoting base 2, 8 and 16 respectively. The length counts the
|
||
significant bits and MUST be between 1 and 32, inclusive, after a
|
||
dotted quad, or between 1 and 256, inclusive, after one of the other
|
||
forms. If the length is omitted, the implicit length is 32 for a
|
||
dotted quad or 1, 3 or 4 times the number of binary, octal or
|
||
hexadecimal digits supplied, respectively, for the other forms.
|
||
|
||
In augmented Backus-Naur form [ABNF],
|
||
|
||
bit-string-label = "\[" bit-spec "]"
|
||
|
||
bit-spec = bit-data [ "/" length ]
|
||
/ dotted-quad [ "/" slength ]
|
||
|
||
bit-data = "x" 1*64HEXDIG
|
||
/ "o" 1*86OCTDIG
|
||
/ "b" 1*256BIT
|
||
|
||
dotted-quad = decbyte "." decbyte "." decbyte "." decbyte
|
||
|
||
decbyte = 1*3DIGIT
|
||
|
||
length = NZDIGIT *2DIGIT
|
||
|
||
slength = NZDIGIT [ DIGIT ]
|
||
|
||
OCTDIG = %x30-37
|
||
|
||
NZDIGIT = %x31-39
|
||
|
||
If a <length> is present, the number of digits in the <bit-data>
|
||
MUST be just sufficient to contain the number of bits specified by
|
||
the <length>. If there are insignificant bits in a final
|
||
hexadecimal or octal digit, they MUST be zero. A <dotted-quad>
|
||
always has all four parts even if the associated <slength> is less
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Expires November 10, 1999 Crawford [Page 3]
|
||
|
||
Internet Draft Binary DNS Labels May 5, 1999
|
||
|
||
|
||
than 24, but, like the other forms, insignificant bits MUST be zero.
|
||
|
||
Each number represented by a <decbyte> must be between 0 and 255,
|
||
inclusive.
|
||
|
||
The number represented by <length> must be between 1 and 256
|
||
inclusive.
|
||
|
||
The number represented by <slength> must be between 1 and 32
|
||
inclusive.
|
||
|
||
When the textual form of a Bit-String Label is generated by machine,
|
||
the length SHOULD be explicit, not implicit.
|
||
|
||
|
||
3.2.1. Examples
|
||
|
||
The following four textual forms represent the same Bit-String
|
||
Label.
|
||
|
||
\[b11010000011101]
|
||
\[o64072/14]
|
||
\[xd074/14]
|
||
\[208.116.0.0/14]
|
||
|
||
The following represents two consecutive Bit-String Labels which
|
||
denote the same relative point in the DNS tree as any of the above
|
||
single Bit-String Labels.
|
||
|
||
\[b11101].\[o640]
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
3.3. Canonical Representation and Sort Order
|
||
|
||
Both the wire form and the text form of binary labels have a degree
|
||
of flexibility in their grouping into multiple consecutive Bit-
|
||
String Labels. For generating and checking DNS signature records
|
||
[DNSSEC] binary labels must be in a predictable form. This
|
||
canonical form is defined as the form which has the fewest possible
|
||
Bit-String Labels and in which all except possibly the first (least
|
||
significant) label in any sequence of consecutive Bit-String Labels
|
||
is of maximum length.
|
||
|
||
For example, the canonical form of any sequence of up to 256 One-Bit
|
||
Labels has a single Bit-String Label, and the canonical form of a
|
||
sequence of 513 to 768 One-Bit Labels has three Bit-String Labels of
|
||
which the second and third contain 256 label bits.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Expires November 10, 1999 Crawford [Page 4]
|
||
|
||
Internet Draft Binary DNS Labels May 5, 1999
|
||
|
||
|
||
The canonical sort order of domain names [DNSSEC] is extended to
|
||
encompass binary labels as follows. Sorting is still label-by-
|
||
label, from most to least significant, where a label may now be a
|
||
One-Bit Label or a standard (code 00) label. Any One-Bit Label
|
||
sorts before any standard label, and a 0 bit sorts before a 1 bit.
|
||
The absence of a label sorts before any label, as specified in
|
||
[DNSSEC].
|
||
|
||
For example, the following domain names are correctly sorted.
|
||
|
||
foo.example
|
||
\[b1].foo.example
|
||
\[b100].foo.example
|
||
\[b101].foo.example
|
||
bravo.\[b10].foo.example
|
||
alpha.foo.example
|
||
|
||
|
||
4. Processing Rules
|
||
|
||
A One-Bit Label never matches any other kind of label. In
|
||
particular, the DNS labels represented by the single ASCII
|
||
characters "0" and "1" do not match One-Bit Labels represented by
|
||
the bit values 0 and 1.
|
||
|
||
|
||
5. Discussion
|
||
|
||
A Count of zero in the wire-form represents a 256-bit sequence, not
|
||
to optimize that particular case, but to make it completely
|
||
impossible to have a zero-bit label.
|
||
|
||
|
||
6. IANA Considerations
|
||
|
||
This document defines one Extended Label Type, termed the Bit-String
|
||
Label, and requests registration of the code point 000001 binary in
|
||
the space defined by [EDNS0].
|
||
|
||
|
||
7. Security Considerations
|
||
|
||
All security considerations which apply to traditional ASCII DNS
|
||
labels apply equally to binary labels. he canonicalization and
|
||
sorting rules of section 3.3 allow these to be addressed by DNS
|
||
Security [DNSSEC].
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Expires November 10, 1999 Crawford [Page 5]
|
||
|
||
Internet Draft Binary DNS Labels May 5, 1999
|
||
|
||
|
||
8. References
|
||
|
||
[ABNF] D. Crocker, Ed., P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
|
||
Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234.
|
||
|
||
[DNSIS] P.V. Mockapetris, "Domain names - implementation and
|
||
specification", RFC 1035.
|
||
|
||
[DNSSEC]D. Eastlake, 3rd, C. Kaufman, "Domain Name System Security
|
||
Extensions", RFC 2065.
|
||
|
||
[EDNS0] P. Vixie, "Extension mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0)", Currently
|
||
draft-dnsind-edns0-01.txt.
|
||
|
||
[KWORD] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
|
||
Requirement Levels," RFC 2119.
|
||
|
||
|
||
9. Author's Address
|
||
|
||
Matt Crawford
|
||
Fermilab MS 368
|
||
PO Box 500
|
||
Batavia, IL 60510
|
||
USA
|
||
|
||
Phone: +1 630 840-3461
|
||
|
||
EMail: crawdad@fnal.gov
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Expires November 10, 1999 Crawford [Page 6]
|
||
|