mirror of
https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/bind9
synced 2025-08-30 05:57:52 +00:00
new draft
This commit is contained in:
parent
3d00f74888
commit
10d63f4cef
@ -1,10 +1,11 @@
|
||||
|
||||
IETF DNSEXT WG Bill Manning
|
||||
draft-dnsext-opcode-discover-00.txt ISI
|
||||
draft-dnsext-opcode-discover-01.txt ISI
|
||||
Paul Vixie
|
||||
ISC
|
||||
Erik Guttman
|
||||
SUN
|
||||
11 Apr 2002
|
||||
21 Dec 2002
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
The DISCOVER opcode
|
||||
@ -36,7 +37,7 @@ The capitalized keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
|
||||
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
|
||||
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119
|
||||
|
||||
Abstract:
|
||||
0. Abstract:
|
||||
|
||||
The QUERY opcode in the DNS is designed for unicast. With the
|
||||
development of multicast capabilities in the DNS, it is desireable
|
||||
@ -51,7 +52,7 @@ Abstract:
|
||||
was developed as part of the TBDS project, funded under DARPA grant
|
||||
F30602-99-1-0523.
|
||||
|
||||
Introduction:
|
||||
1. Introduction:
|
||||
|
||||
This document describes an experimental extension to the DNS to receive
|
||||
multiple responses which is the likely result when using DNS that has
|
||||
@ -60,7 +61,7 @@ Introduction:
|
||||
full processing rules used by TBDS are documented here for possible
|
||||
incorporation in a future revision of the DNS specification."
|
||||
|
||||
Method:
|
||||
2. Method:
|
||||
|
||||
DISCOVER works like QUERY except:
|
||||
|
||||
@ -88,7 +89,7 @@ Method:
|
||||
address of the requester and the source address should reflect
|
||||
the unicast address of the responder.
|
||||
|
||||
Example usage for gethostby{name,addr}-style requestors:
|
||||
Example usage for gethostby{name,addr}-style requestors:
|
||||
|
||||
Compute the zone name of the enclosing in-addr.arpa, ip6.int, or
|
||||
ip6.arpa domain.
|
||||
@ -118,7 +119,7 @@ Example usage for gethostby{name,addr}-style requestors:
|
||||
|
||||
Cache all NS and A data learned in this process, respecting TTL's.
|
||||
|
||||
TBDS usage for SRV requestors:
|
||||
TBDS usage for SRV requestors:
|
||||
|
||||
Do the gethostbyaddr() and gethostbyname() on one's own link-local
|
||||
address, using the above process.
|
||||
@ -173,22 +174,22 @@ TBDS usage for SRV requestors:
|
||||
zone names which match QNAME's, not with zone names which are owned
|
||||
by QNAME's.
|
||||
|
||||
The only deviation from the DNS[3][4] model is that a host (like, say, a
|
||||
printer offering LPD services) has a DNS server which answers authoritatively
|
||||
for something which hasn't been delegated to it. However, the only way that
|
||||
such DNS servers can be discovered is with a new opcode, DISCOVER, which
|
||||
is explicitly defined to discover undelegated zones for tightly scoped
|
||||
purposes. Therefore this isn't officially a violation of DNS's coherency
|
||||
principles.
|
||||
The only deviation from the DNS[3][4] model is that a host (like, say, a
|
||||
printer offering LPD services) has a DNS server which answers authoritatively
|
||||
for something which hasn't been delegated to it. However, the only way that
|
||||
such DNS servers can be discovered is with a new opcode, DISCOVER, which
|
||||
is explicitly defined to discover undelegated zones for tightly scoped
|
||||
purposes. Therefore this isn't officially a violation of DNS's coherency
|
||||
principles. In some cases, a responder to DISCOVER, may not be traditional
|
||||
DNS software, it could be special purpose software.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
IANA Considerations
|
||||
3. IANA Considerations
|
||||
|
||||
As a new opcode, the IANA will need to assign a numeric value
|
||||
for the memnonic. The last OPCODE assigned was "5", for UPDATE.
|
||||
Test implementations have used OPCODE "6".
|
||||
Test implementations have used OPCODE "6".
|
||||
|
||||
Security Considerations
|
||||
4. Security Considerations
|
||||
|
||||
No new security considerations are known to be introduced with a new
|
||||
opcode, however using multicast for service discovery has the potential
|
||||
@ -229,8 +230,17 @@ Erik Guttman and Bill Manning were active contributors.
|
||||
|
||||
7. References
|
||||
|
||||
[1] draft-ietf-dnsext-mdns-00.txt
|
||||
[2] draft-manning-dnsext-mdns-00.txt
|
||||
[3] RFC 1034
|
||||
[4] RFC 1035
|
||||
----------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
Informational References:
|
||||
|
||||
[1] Esibov, L., Aboba, B., Thaler, D., "Multicast DNS",
|
||||
draft-ietf-dnsext-mdns-00.txt, November 2000. Expired
|
||||
|
||||
[2] Woodcock, B., Manning, B., "Multicast Domain Name Service",
|
||||
draft-manning-dnsext-mdns-00.txt, August 2000. Expired.
|
||||
|
||||
Normative References:
|
||||
[3] Mockapetris, P., "DOMAIN NAMES - CONCEPTS AND FACILITIES",
|
||||
RFC 1034, November 1987.
|
||||
[4] Mockapetris, P., "DOMAIN NAMES - IMPLEMENTATION AND SPECIFICATION",
|
||||
RFC 1035, November 1987
|
||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user