idnits 2.17.1 draft-dickinson-dnsop-deprecating-status-opcode-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year (Using the creation date from RFC1035, updated by this document, for RFC5378 checks: 1987-11-01) -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (May 13, 2019) is 1810 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) No issues found here. Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 dnsop J. Dickinson 3 Internet-Draft Sinodun IT 4 Updates: 1035 (if approved) May 13, 2019 5 Intended status: Standards Track 6 Expires: November 14, 2019 8 Depreciating the DNS Status OpCode 9 draft-dickinson-dnsop-deprecating-status-opcode-00 11 Abstract 13 This document updates RFC1035 to depreciate the Status DNS OpCode. 15 Status of This Memo 17 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 18 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 20 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 21 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 22 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 23 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 25 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 26 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 27 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 28 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 30 This Internet-Draft will expire on November 14, 2019. 32 Copyright Notice 34 Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 35 document authors. All rights reserved. 37 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 38 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 39 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 40 publication of this document. Please review these documents 41 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 42 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 43 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 44 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 45 described in the Simplified BSD License. 47 Table of Contents 49 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 50 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 51 3. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 52 4. Depreciating the Status OpCode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 53 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 54 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 55 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 56 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 57 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 58 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 59 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 61 1. Introduction 63 The Status OpCode was given the value of 2 in [RFC1035]. However, no 64 RFC defines what it means or how it should be used. This document 65 makes the Status OpCode obsolete. 67 2. Terminology 69 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 70 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 71 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 72 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all 73 capitals, as shown here. 75 3. Implementation Status 77 To the author's knowledge there is no implementation of the Status 78 OpCode. A quick test shows inconsistent responses to a Status 79 request with different DNS server implementations returning NotImp, 80 Refused or giving no response at all. 82 4. Depreciating the Status OpCode 84 The Status OpCode MUST be marked OBSOLETE. 86 The correct response to the Status OpCode MUST be NotImp. 88 5. Security Considerations 90 None 92 6. IANA Considerations 94 This documents updates the IANA registry "Domain Name System (DNS) 95 Parameters OpCode registry" [DNS-IANA]. 97 +--------+-------------------+---------------+ 98 | OpCode | Name | Reference | 99 +--------+-------------------+---------------+ 100 | 2 | Status (OBSOLETE) | This Document | 101 +--------+-------------------+---------------+ 103 7. Acknowledgments 105 Thanks to Mark Andrews, Matt Pounsett, Roy Arends and all the people 106 at IETF 104 that I asked if they knew of any usage of this OpCode. 107 Also thanks to Shane Kerr for reminding me to write this document. 109 8. References 111 8.1. Normative References 113 [RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and 114 specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, DOI 10.17487/RFC1035, 115 November 1987, . 117 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 118 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 119 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 120 . 122 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 123 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 124 May 2017, . 126 8.2. Informative References 128 [DNS-IANA] 129 IANA, "Domain Name System (DNS) Parameters OpCode 130 registry", . 133 Author's Address 134 John Dickinson 135 Sinodun IT 136 Magdalen Centre 137 Oxford Science Park 138 Oxford OX4 4GA 140 Email: jad@sinodun.com