ComputerSurge/bind9
3
0
Fork 0
Code Pull Requests 1 Activity
Files
876da2a83da2b2fa74d765673da78a5fdc1b3c6d
bind9/doc/draft/draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-roadmap-06.txt
Mark Andrews 14b6c928d7 new draft
2002-09-09 21:07:19 +00:00

842 lines
25 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Blame History

DNS Extensions S. Rose
Internet-Draft NIST
Expires: March 6, 2003 September 5, 2002
DNS Security Document Roadmap
draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-roadmap-06
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.
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 6, 2003.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
DNS Security (DNSSEC) technology is composed of extensions to the
Domain Name System (DNS) protocol that provide data integrity and
authentication to security aware resolvers and applications through
the use of cryptographic digital signatures. Several documents exist
to describe these extensions and the implementation-specific details
regarding specific digital signing schemes. The interrelationship
between these different documents is discussed here. A brief
overview of what to find in which document and author guidelines for
what to include in new DNS Security documents, or revisions to
existing documents, is described.
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Document Roadmap September 2002
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Interrelationship of DNS Security Documents . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Relationship of DNS Security Documents to other DNS
Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Recommended Content for new DNS Security Documents . . . . . . 9
4.1 Security Related Resource Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2 Digital Signature Algorithm Implementations . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3 Refinement of Security Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.4 The Use of DNS Security Extensions with Other Protocols . . . 10
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Document Roadmap September 2002
1. Introduction
This document is intended to provide guidelines for the development
of supplemental documents describing security extensions to the
Domain Name System (DNS).
The main goal of the DNS Security (DNSSEC) protocol extensions is to
add data authentication and integrity services to the DNS protocol.
These protocol extensions should be differentiated from DNS
operational security issues, which are beyond the scope of this
effort. DNS Security documents fall into one or possibly more of the
following sub-categories: new DNS security resource records,
implementation details of specific digital signing algorithms for use
in DNS Security and Secure DNS transactions. Since the goal of DNS
Security extensions is to become part of the DNS protocol standard,
additional documents that seek to refine a portion of the security
extensions will be introduced as the specifications progress along
the IETF standards track.
There is a set of basic guidelines for each sub-category of documents
that explains what should be included, what should be considered a
protocol extension, and what should be considered an operational
issue. Currently, there are at least two documents that fall under
operational security considerations that deal specifically with the
DNS security extensions: the first is RFC 2541 [6] which deals with
the operational side of implementing the security extensions; the
other is the CAIRN DNSSEC testbed Internet draft [CAIRN]. These
documents should be considered part of the operational side of DNS,
but will be addressed as a supplemental part of the DNS Security
roadmap. That is not to say that these two documents are not
important to securing a DNS zone, but they do not directly address
the proposed DNS security extensions. Authors of documents that seek
to address the operational concerns of DNS security should be aware
of the structure of DNS Security documentation if they wish to
include their documents in the DNSEXT Working Group in addition to
the DNS Operations WG.
It is assumed the reader has some knowledge of the Domain Name System
[2] and the Domain Name System Security Extensions [1].
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Document Roadmap September 2002
2. Interrelationship of DNS Security Documents
The DNSSEC set of documents can be partitioned into five main groups
as depicted in Figure 1. All of these documents in turn are under
the larger umbrella group of DNS base protocol documents. It is
possible that some documents fall into more than one of these
categories, such as RFC 2535, and should follow the guidelines for
the all of the document groups it falls into. However, it is wise to
limit the number of "uberdocuments" that try to be everything to
everyone. The documents listed in each category are current as to
the time of writing.
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Document Roadmap September 2002
---------------------------------------------------------------------
+--------------------------------+
| |
| Base DNS Protocol Docs. |
| [RFC1035, RFC2181, etc.] |
| |
+--------------------------------+
|
|
|
+------------+ +-----------+ +-------------+
| New | | DNSSEC | | New |
| Security |----------| protocol |----------| Security |
| RRs | | | | Uses |
+------------+ | | +-------------+
+-----------+
|
|
+----------------------+***********************
| | *
| | *
+------------+ +---------------+ +-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-+
| DS | | | | Implementation |
| Algorithm | | Transactions | * Notes *
| Impl. | | | | |
+------------+ +---------------+ +-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-+
DNSSEC Document Roadmap
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The "DNSSEC protocol" document set refers to the document that makes
up the groundwork for adding security to the DNS protocol [1]and
updates to this document. RFC 2535 laid out the goals and
expectations of DNS Security and the new security-related Resource
Records KEY, SIG, DS [19] and NXT. Expanding from this document,
related document groups include the implementation documents of
various digital signature algorithms with DNSSEC, and documents
further refining the transaction of messages. It is expected that
RFC 2535 will be obsoleted by one or more documents that refine the
set of security extensions and DNS security transactions [22], [23],
[24]. Documents that seek to modify or clarify the base protocol
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Document Roadmap September 2002
documents should state so clearly in the introduction of the document
(as well as proscribe to the IETF guidelines of RFC/Internet Draft
author guidelines). Also, the portions of the specification to be
modified should be synopsized in the new document for the benefit of
the reader. The "DNSSEC protocol" set includes the documents [1],
[11], [12], [9], [14], [15], [21], [20], [OPTIN], [16] and their
derivative documents.
The "New Security RRs" set refers to the group of documents that seek
to add additional Resource Records to the set of base DNS Record
types. These new records can be related to securing the DNS protocol
[1], [8], or using DNS security for other purposes such as storing
certificates [5].
The "DS Algorithm Impl" document set refers to the group of documents
that describe how a specific digital signature algorithm is
implemented to fit the DNSSEC Resource Record format. Each one of
these documents deals with one specific digital signature algorithm.
Examples of this set include [4], [5], [25], [18][17] and [13].
The "Transactions" document set refers to the group of documents that
deal with the message transaction sequence of security-related DNS
operations. The contents and sequence for operations such as dynamic
update [3], [11] and transaction signatures [10] are described in
this document category. Additional message transaction schemes to
support DNSSEC operation would also fall under this group, including
secret key establishment [7], [RENEW], and verification.
The final document set, "New Security Uses", refers to documents that
seek to use proposed DNS Security extensions for other security
related purposes. Documents that fall in this category include the
use of DNS in the storage and distribution of certificates and
individual user public keys (PGP, e-mail, etc.) Some documents in
this group may fall beyond the DNSEXT WG scope, but they are included
because of their use of the security extensions. The documents in
this group should not propose any changes to the DNS protocol to
support other protocols; only how existing DNS security records and
transactions can be used to support other protocols. Such documents
include [SSH-DNS] and [IPSEC-DNS] which deals with storing SSH and
IPSec keying information the DNS using new records and utilizing
DNSSEC to provide authentication and integrity checking.
Lastly, there is a set of documents that should be classified as
"Implementation Notes". Because the DNS security extensions are
still in the developmental stage, there is an audience for documents
that detail the transition and implementation of the security
extensions. These have more to do with the practical side of DNS
operations, but can also point to places in the protocol
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Document Roadmap September 2002
specifications that need improvement. Documents in this set may be
offspring of both the DNSEXT and/or DNSOP Working Groups. An example
of this type is the report on the CAIRN DNSSEC testbed [CAIRN] This
document was submitted through the DNSOP Working Group, however the
main concern of this document is the implementation and limitations
of the DNS security extensions, hence their interest to the DNS
security community. The CAIRN draft deals with the implementation of
a secure DNS. Authors of documents that deal with the implementation
and operational side of the DNSSEC specifications would be advised/
encouraged to submit their documents to the DNSEXT Working Group as
well.
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Document Roadmap September 2002
3. Relationship of DNS Security Documents to other DNS Documents
The DNS security-related extensions should be considered a subset of
the DNS protocol. The DNS Security Working Group of the IETF
(DNSSEC) has been absorbed into the larger DNS Extensions Working
Group (DNSEXT). Therefore, all DNS security-related documents should
be seen as a subset of the main DNS architecture documents. It is a
good idea for authors of future DNS security documents to be familiar
with the contents of these base protocol documents.
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Document Roadmap September 2002
4. Recommended Content for new DNS Security Documents
Documents that seek to make additions or revisions to the DNS
protocol to add security should follow common guidelines as to
minimum required content and structure. It is the purpose of this
document roadmap to establish criteria for content that any new DNS
security protocol specifications document should contain. These
criteria should be interpreted as a minimum set of information
required/needed in a document, any additional information regarding
the specific extension should also be included in the document.
These criteria are not officially part of the IETF guidelines
regarding RFC/Internet Drafts, but should be considered as guidance
to promote uniformity to Working Group documents.
Since the addition of security to the DNS protocol is now considered
a general extension to the DNS protocol, any guideline for the
contents of a DNS Security document could be taken as a suggestion
for the contents of any DNS extension document.
4.1 Security Related Resource Records
Documents describing a new type of DNS Security Resource Record (RR)
should contain information describing the structure and use of the
new RR type. It is a good idea to only discuss one new type in a
document, unless the set of new resource records are closely related
or a protocol extension requires the use of more than one new record
type. Specifically, each document detailing a new security-related
RR type should include the following information:
o The format of the new RR type, both "on the wire" (bit format) and
ASCII representation (for text zone files), if appropriate;
o when and in what section of a DNS query/response this new RR type
is to be included;
o at which level of the DNS hierarchy this new RR type is to be
considered authoritative (i.e. in a zone, in a zone's superzone)
and who is authoritative to sign the new RR;
4.2 Digital Signature Algorithm Implementations
Documents describing the implementation details of a specific digital
signature algorithm such as [4] ,[13] (and others as new digital
signatures schemes are introduced) for use with DNS Security should
include the following information:
o The format/encoding of the algorithm's public key for use in a KEY
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Document Roadmap September 2002
Resource Record;
o the acceptable key size for use with the algorithm;
o the current known status of the algorithm (as one of REQUIRED,
RECOMMENDED, or OPTIONAL).
In addition, authors are encouraged to include any necessary
description of the algorithm itself, as well as any know/suspected
weaknesses as an appendix to the document. This is for reference
only, as the goals of the DNSEXT working group is to propose
extensions to the DNS protocol, not cryptographic research.
4.3 Refinement of Security Procedures
This set of documents includes DNS protocol operations that
specifically relate to DNS Security, such as DNS secret key
establishment [7] and security extensions to pre-existing or
proposed DNS operations such as dynamic update [3]. Documents that
describe a new set of DNS message transactions, or seek to refine a
current series of transactions that make up a DNS operation should
include the following information:
o The order in which the DNS messages are sent by the operation
initiator and target;
o the format of these DNS messages;
o any required authentication mechanisms for each stage of the
operation and the required authority for that mechanism (i.e.
zone, host, or some other trusted authority such as a DNS
administrator or certificate authority);
4.4 The Use of DNS Security Extensions with Other Protocols
Because of the flexibility and ubiquity of the DNS, there may exist
other Internet protocols and applications that could make use of, or
extend, the DNS security protocols. Examples of this type of
document include the use of DNS to support IPSEC [IPSEC-DNS], SSH
[SSH-DNS} the Public Key Infrastructure (PKI). It is beyond the
scope of this roadmap to describe the contents of this class of
documents. However, if uses or extensions require the addition or
modification of a DNS Resource Record type or DNS query/response
transactions, then the guidelines laid out in the previous sections
of this document should be adhered to.
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Document Roadmap September 2002
5. Security Considerations
This document provides a roadmap and guidelines for writing DNS
Security related documents. The reader should follow all the
security procedures and guidelines described in the DNS Security
Extensions document [1].
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Document Roadmap September 2002
6. Acknowledgements
In addition to the RFCs mentioned in this document, there are also
numerous Internet drafts that fall in one or more of the categories
of DNS Security documents mentioned above. Depending on where (and
if) these documents are on the IETF standards track, the reader may
not be able to access these documents through the RFC repositories.
All of these documents are "Work in Progress" and are subject to
change; therefore a version number is not supplied for the current
revision. Some Internet Drafts are in the RFC editor's queue or
nearing WG Last Call at the time of writing. These Drafts have been
placed in the References section. The drafts below are still subject
to agreement in the IETF.
o CAIRN: D. Massey, T. Lehman, and E. Lewis. "DNSSEC
Implementation in the CAIRN Testbed". draft-ietf-dnsop-
dnsseccairn-NN.txt
o OPTIN: M. Kosters. "DNSSEC Opt-in for Large Zones" draft-
kosters-dnsext-dnssec-opt-in-NN.txt
o SSH-DNS: W. Griffin, J. Schlyter. "Using DNS to securely
publish SSH key fingerprints" draft-ietf-secsh-dns-NN.txt
o IPSEC-DNS: M. Richardson. "A method for storing IPsec keying
material in DNS". draft-richardson-ipsec-rr-NN.txt
o RENEW: Y. Kamite, M. Nakayama. "TKEY Secret Key Renewal Mode".
draft-ietf-dnsext-tkey-renewal-mode-NN.txt
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Document Roadmap September 2002
References
[1] Eastlake, D., "Domain Name System Security Extensions", RFC
2535, March 1999.
[2] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
[3] Eastlake, D., "Secure Domain Name System Dynamic Update", RFC
2137, April 1997.
[4] Eastlake, D., "DSA KEYs and SIGs in the Domain Name System
(DNS)", RFC 2536, March 1999.
[5] Eastlake, D. and O. Gudmundsson, "Storing Certificates in the
Domain Name System (DNS)", RFC 2538, March 1999.
[6] Eastlake, D., "DNS Security Operational Considerations", RFC
2541, March 1999.
[7] Eastlake, D., "Secret Key Establishment for DNS (TKEY RR)", RFC
2930, September 2000.
[8] Eastlake, D., "DNS Request and Transaction Signatures (
SIG(0)s)", RFC 2931, September 2000.
[9] Lewis, E., "DNS Security Extension Clarification on Zone
Status", RFC 3090, March 2001.
[10] Vixie, P., Gudmundsson, O., Eastlake, D. and B. Wellington,
"Secret Key Transaction Authentication for DNS (TSIG)", RFC
2845, May 2000.
[11] Wellington, B., "Secure Domain Name System (DNS) Dynamic
Update", RFC 3007, November 2000.
[12] Wellington, B., "Domain Name System Security (DNSSEC) Signing
Authority", RFC 3008, April 2000.
[13] Eastlake, D., "RSA/SHA-1 SIGs and RSA KEYs in the Domain Name
System (DNS)", RFC 3110, May 2001.
[14] Conrad, D., "Indicating Resolver Support of DNSSEC", RFC 3225,
December 2001.
[15] Gudmundsson, O., "DNSSEC and IPv6 A6 aware server/resolver
message size requirements", RFC 3226, December 2001.
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Document Roadmap September 2002
[16] Austein, R. and D. Atkins, "Threat Analysis of the Domain Name
System (Work in Progress)", RFC XXXX.
[17] Eastlake, R., "Storage of Diffie-Hellman Keys in the Domain
Name System (DNS) (Work in Progress)", RFC XXXX.
[18] Eastlake, D. and R. Schroeppel, "Elliptic Curve KEYs in the DNS
(Work in Progress)", RFC XXXX.
[19] Gundmundsson, O., "Delegation Signer Record in Parent (Work in
Progress)", RFC XXXX.
[20] Massey, D. and S. Rose, "Limiting the Scope of the KEY Resource
Record (Work in Progress)", RFC XXXX.
[21] Wellington, B., "Redefinition of the DNS AD bit (Work in
Progress)", RFC XXXX.
[22] Arends, R., Larson, M., Massey, D. and S. Rose, "DNS Security
Introduction and Requirements (Work in Progress)", RFC XXXX.
[23] Arends, R., Larson, M., Massey, D. and S. Rose, "DNS Security
Introduction and Requirements (Work in Progress)", RFC XXXX.
[24] Arends, R., Larson, M., Massey, D. and S. Rose, "DNS Security
Introduction and Requirements (Work in Progress)", RFC XXXX.
[25] Kwan, S., Garg, P., Gilroy, J. and L. Esibov, "GSS Algorithm
for TSIG (Work in Progress)", RFC XXXX.
Author's Address
Scott Rose
National Institute for Standards and Technology
100 Bureau Drive
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-3460
USA
EMail: scott.rose@nist.gov
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Document Roadmap September 2002
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). 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 implementation 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.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Rose Expires March 6, 2003 [Page 15]
View Git Blame Copy Permalink