draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-03.txt   draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-04.txt 
dnsop D. Crocker dnsop D. Crocker
Internet-Draft Brandenburg InternetWorking Internet-Draft Brandenburg InternetWorking
Intended status: Best Current Practice March 19, 2018 Intended status: Best Current Practice March 22, 2018
Expires: September 20, 2018 Expires: September 23, 2018
DNS Scoped Data Through '_Underscore' Naming of Attribute Leaves DNS Scoped Data Through '_Underscore' Naming of Attribute Leaves
draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-03 draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-04
Abstract Abstract
Formally, any DNS resource record may occur for any domain name. Formally, any DNS resource record may occur for any domain name.
However some services have defined an operational convention that However some services have defined an operational convention, which
applies to DNS leaf nodes that are under a DNS branch that has one or applies to DNS leaf nodes that are under a DNS branch having one or
more reserved node names that begin with an underscore. The more reserved node names, each beginning with an underscore. The
underscore naming construct defines a semantic scope for DNS records underscore naming construct defines a semantic scope for DNS records
that are associated with the parent domain, above the underscored that are associated with the parent domain, above the underscored
branch. This specification explores the nature of this DNS usage and branch. This specification explores the nature of this DNS usage and
defines the "DNS Global Underscore Scoped Entry Registry" with IANA. defines the "DNS Global Underscore Scoped Entry Registry" with IANA.
The purpose of the Underscore registry is to avoid collisions The purpose of the Underscore registry is to avoid collisions
resulting from the use of the same underscore-based name, for resulting from the use of the same underscore-based name, for
different services. different services.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
skipping to change at page 1, line 40 skipping to change at page 1, line 40
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 20, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 23, 2018.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. _Underscore Scoping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. _Underscore Scoping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2. Scaling Benefits for TXT, SRV, and URI Resource Records . 4 1.2. Scaling Benefits for TXT, SRV, and URI Resource Records . 3
2. DNS Underscore Scoped Entry Registries Function . . . . . . . 4 2. DNS Underscore Scoped Entry Registries Function . . . . . . . 4
2.1. DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry Definition . 5 2.1. DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry Definition . 5
2.2. DNS Common Second-Level Underscore Scoped Entry Registry 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1. DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry . . . . . . . 6
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1. DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry . . . . . . . 7 5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2. DNS Common Second-Level Underscore Scoped Entry 5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.2. References -- Informative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.3. URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.2. References -- Informative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.3. URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The core Domain Name System (DNS) technical specifications assign no The core Domain Name System (DNS) technical specifications assign no
semantics to domain names or their parts, and no constraints upon semantics to domain names or their parts, and no constraints upon
which resource records (RRs) are permitted to be associated with which resource records (RRs) are permitted to be associated with
particular names.[RFC1035] Over time, some leaf node names, such as particular names.[RFC1035] Over time, some leaf node names, such as
"www" and "ftp" have come to imply support for particular services, "www" and "ftp" have come to imply support for particular services,
but this is a matter of operational convention, rather than defined but this is a matter of operational convention, rather than defined
protocol semantics. This freedom in the basic technology has protocol semantics. This freedom in the basic technology has
skipping to change at page 3, line 24 skipping to change at page 3, line 15
node names begin with an underscore ("_"). Because the DNS rules for node names begin with an underscore ("_"). Because the DNS rules for
a "host" (host name) are not allowed to use the underscore character, a "host" (host name) are not allowed to use the underscore character,
this distinguishes the underscore name from all legal host names this distinguishes the underscore name from all legal host names
[RFC1035]. Effectively, this convention for leaf node naming creates [RFC1035]. Effectively, this convention for leaf node naming creates
a space for the listing of 'attributes' -- in the form of resource a space for the listing of 'attributes' -- in the form of resource
records -- that are associated with the parent domain, above the records -- that are associated with the parent domain, above the
underscore sub-branch. underscore sub-branch.
The scoping feature is particularly useful when generalized resource The scoping feature is particularly useful when generalized resource
records are used -- notably "TXT", "SRV", and "URI" records are used -- notably "TXT", "SRV", and "URI"
[RFC1035],[RFC2782],[RFC7553]. It provides efficient separation of [RFC1035],[RFC2782],[RFC6335], [RFC7553]. It provides efficient
one use of them from others. Absent this separation, an separation of one use of them from others. Absent this separation,
undifferentiated mass of these "RR"s is returned to the DNS client, an undifferentiated mass of these "RR"s is returned to the DNS
which then must parse through the internals of the records in the client, which then must parse through the internals of the records in
hope of finding ones that are relevant. Worse, in some cases the the hope of finding ones that are relevant. Worse, in some cases the
results are ambiguous because the records do not adequately self- results are ambiguous because the records do not adequately self-
identify. With underscore-based scoping, only the relevant "RR"s are identify. With underscore-based scoping, only the relevant "RR"s are
returned. returned.
A simple example is DKIM [RFC6376] , which uses "_domainkeys" for A simple example is DKIM [RFC6376] , which uses "_domainkeys" for
defining a place to hold a "TXT" record containing signing defining a place to hold a "TXT" record containing signing
information for the parent domain. information for the parent domain.
This specification formally defines how underscore labels are used as This specification formally defines how underscore labels are used as
"attribute" enhancements for their parent domain names. For example, "attribute" enhancements for their parent domain names. For example,
skipping to change at page 4, line 15 skipping to change at page 4, line 6
1.2. Scaling Benefits for TXT, SRV, and URI Resource Records 1.2. Scaling Benefits for TXT, SRV, and URI Resource Records
Some resource records are generic and support a variety of uses. Some resource records are generic and support a variety of uses.
Each additional use defines its own rules and, possibly, its own Each additional use defines its own rules and, possibly, its own
internal syntax and node-naming conventions to distinguish among internal syntax and node-naming conventions to distinguish among
particular types. The "TXT", "SRV", and "URI" records are notable particular types. The "TXT", "SRV", and "URI" records are notable
examples. Their use can scale poorly, particularly when the same examples. Their use can scale poorly, particularly when the same
"RR" can be present in the same leaf node, but with different uses. "RR" can be present in the same leaf node, but with different uses.
An increasingly-popular approach, with excellent scaling properties, An increasingly-popular approach, with excellent scaling properties,
place the RR undr a node wit an underscore-based name, at a defined place the RR under a node with an underscore-based name, at a defined
place in the DNS tree, so as to constrain to the use of particular place in the DNS tree, so as to constrain the use of particular "RR"s
"RR"s farther down the branch using that name. This means that a farther down the branch with that name. This means that a direct
direct lookup produces only the desired records, at no greater cost lookup produces only the desired records, at no greater cost than a
than a typical DNS lookup. typical DNS lookup.
The definition of a underscore global registry, provided in this The definition of a underscore global registry, provided in this
specification, primarily attends to the "upper-level" names used for specification, primarily attends to the top-most names used for RRs;
RRs; that is the _underscore "global" names. For efficiency, a that is the _underscore "global" names.
single, subordinate _underscore second-level table also is defined,
for use with a common set of applications.
2. DNS Underscore Scoped Entry Registries Function 2. DNS Underscore Scoped Entry Registries Function
A global registry for DNS nodes names that begin with an _underscore A global registry for DNS nodes names that begin with an _underscore
is defined here. The names are used to define scope of use for is defined here.
specific resource records, associated with the domain name that is
the "parent" to the branch defined by the _underscore naming. The 'global' (right-most) node name that uses an _underscore
prefix MUST be entered into this registry.
The names define scope of use for specific resource records, which
are associated with the domain name that is the "parent" to the
branch defined by the _underscore naming.
A given name defines a specific, constrained context for one or A given name defines a specific, constrained context for one or
more RR records, in which use of such records MUST conform to the more RR records, in which use of such records MUST conform to the
defined constraints. Within this scope, other resource records defined constraints. Within this scope, other resource records
that are not specified MAY be used. that are not specified MAY be used.
The purpose of the Underscore Global Registry is to avoid collisions The purpose of the Underscore Global Registry is to avoid collisions
resulting from the use of the same _underscore-based name, for resulting from the use of the same _underscore-based name, for
different applications. different applications.
skipping to change at page 5, line 20 skipping to change at page 5, line 18
| _service1 | | _service1 |
| ._protoB._service2 | | ._protoB._service2 |
| _protoB._service3 | | _protoB._service3 |
| _protoC._service3 | | _protoC._service3 |
| _useX._protoD._service4 | | _useX._protoD._service4 |
| _protoE._region._authority | | _protoE._region._authority |
+----------------------------+ +----------------------------+
Example of Underscore Names Example of Underscore Names
Only the right-most names are registered in the IANA Underscore Only the right-most _underscore names are registered in the IANA
Global table. Definition and registration of the subordinate names Underscore Global table.
is the responsibility of the specification that creates the highest-
level (right-most) registry entry.
For convenience, an Underscore Common Second-Level Names table is Definition and registration of the subordinate underscore node
also defined, to cover some popular cases involving the subordinate names is the responsibility of the specification that creates the
name used with two-level _underscore naming. In particular, this highest-level (right-most) global registry entry.
table covers uses of second-level names that scope SRV RRs use.
That is, if a scheme using a global underscore node name also has
one or more subordinate levels of underscore node naming, the
namespaces from which names for those lower levels is chosen is
controlled by the parent underscore node name. Each globally-
registered underscore name owns a distinct, subordinate name
space.
2.1. DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry Definition 2.1. DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry Definition
Additions/Removals/Changes: Please post to the list or send the Additions/Removals/Changes: Please post to the list or send the
author direct email, that indicates the exact details of author direct email, that indicates the exact details of
changes needed to this table. If a reference needs to be added changes needed to this table. If a reference needs to be added
or changed, the xml for this would be ideal. Thanks. /d . or changed, the xml for this would be ideal. Thanks. /d .
NOTE TO RFC EDITOR: Please remove "Additions/Removals/ NOTE TO RFC EDITOR: Please remove "Additions/Removals/
Changes" paragraph prior to publication. Changes" paragraph prior to publication.
A registry entry contains: A registry entry contains:
ID: Specifies a textual name for a scoped portion of the DNS. ID: Specifies a textual name for a scoped portion of the
The name will usually be taken from the specification cited in DNS. The name will usually be taken from the
the "Purpose" column and is intended for use in discussions specification cited in the "Purpose" column and is
about the entry. intended for use in discussions about the entry.
_Node Name: Specifies a single _underscore name that defines a _Node Name: Specifies a single _underscore name that defines a
reserved name; this name is the "global" entry name for the reserved name; this name is the "global" entry name for
scoped resource records that are associated with that name. the scoped resource records that are associated with
that name.
Constraints: Specifies any restrictions on use of the DNS Constraints: Specifies any restrictions on use of the DNS
Label. Label.
RR(s): Lists the RRs that are defined for use within this RR(s): Lists the RRs that are defined for use within this
scope. scope.
References Lists specifications that define the records and their
use under this Name.
Purpose: Specifies the particular purpose/use for specific Purpose: Specifies the particular purpose/use for specific
"RR"(s), defined for use within the scope of the registered "RR"(s), defined for use within the scope of the
underscore name. registered underscore name.
2.2. DNS Common Second-Level Underscore Scoped Entry Registry
Definition
A registry entry contains:
ID: Specifies a textual name for a scoped portion of the DNS,
occurring under a 'global' -- right-most -- _underscore node
name. The name will usually be taken from the specification
cited in the "Purpose" column and is intended for use in
discussions about the entry.
_Node Name: Specifies a single _underscore name that defines a
reserved name; this name is the "second-level" entry name for
the scoped resource records that are associated with that name.
Constraints: Specifies any restrictions on use of the name.
RR(s): Lists the RRs that are defined for use within this
scope.
References Lists specifications that define the records and their References Lists specifications that define the records and their
use under this Name. use under this Name.
Purpose: Specifies the particular purpose/use for specific Control Name of the organization with authority to make changes
"RR"(s), defined for use within the scope of the registered for this registration
underscore name.
3. IANA Considerations 3. IANA Considerations
Per [RFC8126], IANA is requested to establish two registries: Per [RFC8126], IANA is requested to establish two registries:
1. DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry 1. DNS Underscore Global Scoped Entry Registry
2. DNS Underscore Common Second-Level Scoped Entry Registry 2. DNS Underscore Common Second-Level Scoped Entry Registry
This section describes actions requested of IANA. The guidance in This section describes actions requested of IANA. The guidance in
skipping to change at page 8, line 5 skipping to change at page 7, line 15
Additions/Removals/Changes: Please post to the list or send the Additions/Removals/Changes: Please post to the list or send the
author direct email, that indicates the exact details of author direct email, that indicates the exact details of
changes needed to this table. If a reference needs to be added changes needed to this table. If a reference needs to be added
or changed, the xml for this would be ideal. Thanks. /d . or changed, the xml for this would be ideal. Thanks. /d .
NOTE TO RFC EDITOR: Please remove "Additions/Removals/ NOTE TO RFC EDITOR: Please remove "Additions/Removals/
Changes" paragraph prior to publication. Changes" paragraph prior to publication.
Initial entries in the registry are: Initial entries in the registry are:
+-------+------------+-----+------------+---------------------------+ +------+-----------+----+---------------------+-----------+---------+
| ID | _NODE NAME | RR | REFERENCE | PURPOSE | | ID | _NODE | RR | PURPOSE | REFERENCE | CONTROL |
+-------+------------+-----+------------+---------------------------+ | | NAME | | | | |
| SRV | _tcp | SRV | [RFC2782] | Use of SRV for a TCP- | +------+-----------+----+---------------------+-----------+---------+
| TCP | | | | based service | | SRV | _tcp | SR | Use of SRV for a | [RFC2782] | IETF |
| SRV | _udp | SRV | [RFC2782] | Use of SRV for a UDP- | | TCP | | V | TCP-based service | | |
| UDP | | | | based service | | SRV | _udp | SR | Use of SRV for a | [RFC2782] | IETF |
| SPF | _spf | TXT | [RFC7208] | Authorized IP addresses | | UDP | | V | UDP-based service | | |
| | | | | for sending mail | | DKIM | _domainke | TX | Public key for | [RFC6376] | IETF |
| DKIM | _domainkey | TXT | [RFC6376] | Public key for verifying | | | y | T | verifying DKIM | | |
| | | | | DKIM signature. | | | | | signature. | | |
| VBR | _vouch | TXT | [RFC5518] | Vouch-by-refererence | | SPF | _spf | TX | Authorized IP | [RFC7208] | IETF |
| | | | | domain assertion | | | | T | addresses for | | |
+-------+------------+-----+------------+---------------------------+ | | | | sending mail | | |
| DMAR | _dmarc | TX | Published DKIM | [RFC7489] | IETF |
| C | | T | usage practices | | |
| VBR | _vouch | TX | Vouch-by- | [RFC5518] | IETF |
| | | T | refererence domain | | |
| | | | assertion | | |
+------+-----------+----+---------------------+-----------+---------+
Table 1: Underscore Global Registry (initial entries) Table 1: Underscore Global Registry (initial entries)
3.2. DNS Common Second-Level Underscore Scoped Entry Registry
A DNS Common Second-Level Underscore Scoped Entry Registry is for DNS
node names that begin with the underscore character (_) and occur
immediately below a Global ("top-level") node name beginning with an
_underscore.
This registry is to operate under the IANA rules for "First Come
First Served" registration.
The contents of each entry in the Common, Second-Level registry are
defined in Section 2.2.
Initial entries in the registry are:
+-------------+--------------+---------+----------+-----------------+
| ID | _NODE NAME | RR | REFERENC | PURPOSE |
| | | | E | |
+-------------+--------------+---------+----------+-----------------+
| LDAP | _ldap | SRV | [RFC2782 | LDAP server |
| | | | ] | |
| SIP | _sip | NAPTR | [RFC3263 | Locating SIP |
| | | | ] [RFC60 | Servers and UA |
| | | | 11] | configuration |
| PKI LDAP | _PKIXREP | SRV | [RFC4386 | PKI Repository |
| | | | ] | |
| DDDS | --???!-- | SRV | [RFC3404 | Mapping DDDS |
| | | | ] | query to DNS |
| | | | | records |
| SOAP BEEP | _soap-beep | SRV | [RFC4227 | SOAP over BEEP |
| | | | ] | lookup, when no |
| | | | | port specified |
| XMLRPC BEEP | _xmlrpc-beep | SRV | [RFC3529 | Resolve url for |
| | | | ] | XML-RPC using |
| | | | | BEEP |
| Diameter | _diameter | SRV | [RFC6733 | Diameter |
| | | | ] | rendezvous |
| Tunnel | _tunnel | SRV | [RFC3620 | Finding the |
| | | | ] | appropriate |
| | | | | address for |
| | | | | tunneling into |
| | | | | a particular |
| | | | | domain |
| SLP | _slpda | SRV | [RFC3832 | Discovering |
| | | | ] | desired |
| | | | | services in |
| | | | | given DNS |
| | | | | domains |
| Msg Track | _mtqp | SRV | [RFC3887 | Assist in |
| | | | ] | determining the |
| | | | | path that a |
| | | | | particular |
| | | | | message has |
| | | | | taken through a |
| | | | | messaging |
| | | | | system |
| XMPP Client | _xmpp-client | SRV | [RFC6120 | XMPP client |
| | | | ] | lookup of |
| | | | | server |
| XMPP Server | _xmpp-server | SRV | [RFC6120 | XMPP server- |
| | | | ] | server lookup |
| DDDS SRV | _??? | SRV | [RFC3958 | Map domain |
| | | (and | ] | name, |
| | | NAPTR?) | | application |
| | | | | service name, |
| | | | | and application |
| | | | | protocol |
| | | | | dynamically to |
| | | | | target server |
| | | | | and port |
| Kerberos | _kerberos | SRV | [RFC4120 | purpose |
| | | | ] | |
| PKI | _pkixrep | SRV | [RFC4386 | Enables |
| | | | ] | certificate- |
| | | | | using systems |
| | | | | to locate PKI |
| | | | | repositories |
| Certificate | _certificate | SRV | [RFC4387 | Obtain |
| s | s | | ] | certificates |
| | | | | and certificate |
| | | | | revocation |
| | | | | lists (CRLs) |
| | | | | from PKI |
| | | | | repositories |
| PGP Key | _pgpkeys | SRV | [RFC4387 | Obtain |
| Store | | | ] | certificates |
| | | | | and certificate |
| | | | | revocation |
| | | | | lists (CRLs) |
| | | | | from PKI |
| | | | | repositories |
| MSRP Relay | _msrp | SRV | [RFC4976 | purpose |
| Locator | | | ] | |
| Mobile IPv6 | _mip6 | SRV | [RFC5026 | Bootstrap |
| Bootstrap | | | ] [RFC55 | Mobile IPv6 |
| | | | 55] | Home Agent |
| | | | | information |
| | | | | from non- |
| | | | | topological |
| | | | | information |
| Digital | _dvbservdsc | SRV | [RFC5328 | Discover non- |
| Video Broad | | | ] | default DVB |
| casting | | | | entry points |
| | | | | addresses |
| CAPWAP AC | _capwap- | rrs | [RFC5415 | Discover the |
| | control | | ] | CAPWAP AC |
| | | | | address(es) |
| IEEE 802.21 | _mihis | NAPTR, | [RFC5679 | Discovering |
| Mobility | | SRV | ] | servers that |
| | | | | provide IEEE |
| | | | | 802.21-defined |
| | | | | Mobility |
| | | | | Services |
| STUN Client | _stun | SRV | [RFC5389 | Find a STUN |
| /Server | | | ] | server |
| TURN | _turn | SRV | [RFC5766 | Control the |
| | | | ] [RFC59 | operation of a |
| | | | 28] | relay to bypass |
| | | | | NAT |
| STUN NAT | _stun- | SRV | [RFC5780 | Discover the |
| Behavior | behavior | | ] | presence and |
| Discovery | | | | current |
| | | | | behavior of |
| | | | | NATs and |
| | | | | firewalls |
| | | | | between the |
| | | | | STUN client and |
| | | | | the STUN server |
| Sieve | _sieve | SRV | [RFC5804 | Manage Sieve |
| Management | | | ] | scripts on a |
| | | | | remote server |
| AFS VLDB | _afs3-vlserv | SRV | [RFC5864 | Locate services |
| | er | | ] | for the AFS |
| | | | | distributed |
| | | | | file system |
| AFS PTS | _afs3-prserv | SRV | [RFC5864 | Locate services |
| | er | | ] | for the AFS |
| | | | | distributed |
| | | | | file system |
| Mail MSA | _submission | SRV | [RFC6186 | Locate email |
| Submission | | | ] | services |
| IMAP | _imap | SRV | [RFC6186 | Locate email |
| | | | ] | services |
| POP | _pop3 | SRV | [RFC6186 | Locate email |
| | | | ] | services |
| POP TLS | _pop3s | SRV | [RFC6186 | Locate email |
| | | | ] | services |
+-------------+--------------+---------+----------+-----------------+
Table 2: Underscore 2d-Level Registry (initial entries)
4. Security Considerations 4. Security Considerations
This memo raises no security issues. This memo raises no security issues.
5. References 5. References
5.1. Normative References 5.1. Normative References
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 8126, Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 8126,
skipping to change at page 12, line 5 skipping to change at page 8, line 18
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", I-D Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", I-D
draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-11, 2017. draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-11, 2017.
[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and [RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
[RFC2782] Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P., and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for [RFC2782] Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P., and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for
specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782, specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782,
February 2000. February 2000.
[RFC3263] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP): Locating SIP Servers", RFC 3263, June
2002.
[RFC3404] Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)
Part Four: The Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI)
Resolution Application", RFC 3404, October 2002.
[RFC3529] Harold, W., "Using Extensible Markup Language-Remote
Procedure Calling (XML-RPC) in Blocks Extensible Exchange
Protocol (BEEP)", RFC 3529, April 2003.
[RFC3620] New, D., "The TUNNEL Profile", RFC 3620, October 2003.
[RFC3832] Columbia University, Columbia University, Sun
Microsystems, IBM, and IBM, "Remote Service Discovery in
the Service Location Protocol (SLP) via DNS SRV",
RFC 3832, July 2004.
[RFC3887] "Message Tracking Query Protocol", RFC 3887, September
2007.
[RFC3958] Daigle, L. and A. Newton, "Domain-Based Application
Service Location Using SRV RRs and the Dynamic Delegation
Discovery Service (DDDS)", RFC 3958, January 2005.
[RFC4120] USC-ISI, MIT, MIT, and MIT, "The Kerberos Network
Authentication Service (V5)", RFC 4120, July 2005.
[RFC4227] O'Tuathail, E. and M. Rose, "Using the Simple Object
Access Protocol (SOAP) in Blocks Extensible Exchange
Protocol (BEEP)", RFC 4227, January 2006.
[RFC4386] Boeyen, S. and P. Hallam-Baker, "Internet X.509 Public Key
Infrastructure: Repository Locator Service", RFC 4386,
February 2006.
[RFC4387] Gutmann, P., Ed., "Internet X.509 Public Key
Infrastructure Operational Protocols: Certificate Store
Access via HTTP", RFC 4387, February 2006.
[RFC4976] Jennings, C., Mahy, R., and Roach, "Relay Extensions for
the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP)", RFC 4976,
September 2007.
[RFC5026] Giaretta, G., Ed., Kempf, J., and V. Devarapalli, Ed.,
"Mobile IPv6 Bootstrapping in Split Scenario", RFC 5026,
October 2007.
[RFC5328] Adolf, A. and P. MacAvock, "A Uniform Resource Name (URN)
Namespace for the Digital Video Broadcasting Project
(DVB)", RFC 5328, September 2008.
[RFC5389] Rosenberg, Mahy, Matthews, and Wing, "Session Traversal
Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 5389, October 2008.
[RFC5415] Calhoun, P., Ed., Montemurro, M., Ed., and D. Stanley,
Ed., "Control And Provisioning of Wireless Access Points
(CAPWAP) Protocol Specification", RFC 5415, March 2009.
[RFC5518] Hoffman, P., Levine, J., and A. Hathcock, "Vouch By [RFC5518] Hoffman, P., Levine, J., and A. Hathcock, "Vouch By
Reference", RFC 5518, April 2009. Reference", RFC 5518, April 2009.
[RFC5555] Soliman, H., Ed., "Mobile IPv6 Support for Dual Stack [RFC6335] Cotton, M., Eggert, L., Tpuch, J., Westerlund, M., and S.
Hosts and Routers", RFC 5555, June 2009. Cheshire, "nternet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)
Procedures for the Management of the Service Name and
[RFC5679] Bajko, G., "Locating IEEE 802.21 Mobility Services Using Transport Protocol Port Number Registry", RFC 6335, Aug
DNS", RFC 5679, December 2009. 2011.
[RFC5766] Mahy, R., Matthews, P., and J. Rosenberg, "Traversal Using
Relays around NAT (TURN): Relay Extensions to Session
Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 5766, April 2010.
[RFC5780] MacDonald, D. and B. Lowekamp, "NAT Behavior Discovery
Using Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)",
RFC 5780, May 2010.
[RFC5804] Melnikov, A., Ed. and T. Martin, "A Protocol for Remotely
Managing Sieve Scripts", RFC 5804, July 2010.
[RFC5864] Allbery, R., "NS SRV Resource Records for AFS", RFC 5864,
April 2010.
[RFC5928] Petit-Huguenin, M., "Traversal Using Relays around NAT
(TURN) Resolution Mechanism", RFC 5928, August 2010.
[RFC6011] Lawrence, S., Ed. and J. Elwell, "Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP) User Agent Configuration", RFC 6011,
October 2010.
[RFC6120] Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence
Protocol (XMPP): Core", RFC 6120, March 2011.
[RFC6186] Daboo, C., "Use of SRV Records for Locating Email
Submission/Access Services", RFC 6186, March 2011.
[RFC6376] Crocker, D., Hansen, T., and M. Kucherawy, "DomainKeys [RFC6376] Crocker, D., Hansen, T., and M. Kucherawy, "DomainKeys
Identified Mail (DKIM) Signatures", RFC 6376, Sept 2011. Identified Mail (DKIM) Signatures", RFC 6376, Sept 2011.
[RFC6733] Fajardo, V., Arkko, J., Loughney, J., and G. Zorn,
"Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 6733, October 2012.
[RFC7208] Kitterman, S., "Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for [RFC7208] Kitterman, S., "Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for
Authorizing Use of Domains in E-Mail, Version 1", Authorizing Use of Domains in E-Mail, Version 1",
RFC 7208, April 2014. RFC 7208, April 2014.
[RFC7489] Kucherawy, M., Ed. and E. Zwicky, Ed., "Domain-based
Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance
(DMARC)", RFC 7489, March 2015.
[RFC7553] Falstrom, P. and O. Kolkman, "The Uniform Resource [RFC7553] Falstrom, P. and O. Kolkman, "The Uniform Resource
Identifier (URI) DNS Resource Record", RFC 7553, Identifier (URI) DNS Resource Record", RFC 7553,
ISSN 2070-1721, June 2015. ISSN 2070-1721, June 2015.
5.3. URIs 5.3. URIs
[1] mailto:dnsop@ietf.org [1] mailto:dnsop@ietf.org
Appendix A. Acknowledgements Appendix A. Acknowledgements
 End of changes. 25 change blocks. 
344 lines changed or deleted 93 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.46. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/