idnits 2.17.1 draft-eastlake-dnsop-rrtype-srv6-00.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 -- The document date (6 March 2022) is 775 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) == Missing Reference: 'X' is mentioned on line 242, but not defined -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 8499 (Obsoleted by RFC 9499) Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Internet Engineering Task Force D. Eastlake 3 Internet-Draft H. Song 4 Intended status: Standards Track Futurewei Technologies 5 Expires: 7 September 2022 6 March 2022 7 An IPv6 Segment Routing (SRv6) Domain Name System (DNS) Resource Record 8 draft-eastlake-dnsop-rrtype-srv6-00 10 Abstract 12 A Domain Name System (DNS) Resource Record (RR) Type is specified for 13 storing IPv6 Segment Routing (SRv6) Information in the DNS. 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 7 September 2022. 32 Copyright Notice 34 Copyright (c) 2022 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/ 39 license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. 40 Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights 41 and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components 42 extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as 43 described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are 44 provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License. 46 Table of Contents 48 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 49 1.1. IPv6 Segment Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 50 1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 51 2. SRV6 RR Type RDATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 52 3. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 53 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 54 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 55 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 56 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 57 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 58 Appendix A. SRV6 RR Type Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 59 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 61 1. Introduction 63 The Domain Name System (DNS) is a hierarchical, distributed, highly 64 available database with a variety of security features used for bi- 65 directional mapping between domain names and addresses, for email 66 routing, and for other information [RFC1034] [RFC1035]. This data is 67 formatted into resource records (RRs) whose content type and 68 structure are indicated by the RR Type field. General familiarity 69 with the DNS and its terminology [RFC8499] is assumed in this 70 document. 72 1.1. IPv6 Segment Routing 74 Internet Protocol versions 4 (IPv4,[RFC0791]) and 6 (IPv5, [RFC8200]) 75 have long provided header options to include an ordered sequence of 76 addresses in a packet header so the packet travels in order through 77 the nodes specified by that sequence of addresses. This is sometimes 78 referred to as "source routing" because the route or path the packet 79 follows is set at least in part when a sequence of addresses is added 80 to the packet, usually at the packet's source, rather than being 81 dynamically determined as the packet proceeds through the network. 83 IPv6 Segment Routing (SRv6, [RFC8402]) extends "source routing" by 84 generalizing the IPv6 sized "address" quantities in a sequence to be 85 "instructions". [RFC8754] specifies a particular Segment Routing 86 Header (SRH) that may be use used as part of the headers of an IPv6 87 packet to indicate an IPv6 Segment Routing sequence of addresses/ 88 instructions. And [RFC8986] further specifies the structuring of an 89 IPv6 address size quantity such that it is composed of addressing 90 information followed by a function designation which is optionally 91 further followed by arguments to that function. Thus, segment 92 routing might encode a series of operations to be performed on a 93 packet. 95 Furthermore, because a sequence of SRv6 instructions may start with 96 the same constant addressing prefix, methods of compression have been 97 suggested to represent this addressing prefix less often and pack an 98 increased number of quantities into a Segment Routing Header where 99 each quantity may consist optionally of additional address 100 information and/or function designation and/or function arguments. 102 In many ways, the data returned for an SRV6 DNS RR is like an 103 address. For example, it would be reasonable for an application 104 using SRv6 to do a type SRV DNS query [RFC2782] followed by an SRV6 105 query at the resulting domain name. Furthermore, as a fall back, if 106 no SRV6 RR is present in the DNS at a domain name, an application 107 could try querying for the AAAA IPv6 address RR type. 109 1.2. Terminology 111 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 112 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 113 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 114 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all 115 capitals, as shown here. 117 The following acronyms are used in this document: 119 DNS - Domain Name System 121 IANA - Internet Assigned Number Authority 123 RR - DNS Resource Record 125 SRv6 - IPv6 Segment Routing 127 SRV6 - Mnemonic for the SRv6 RR Type 129 2. SRV6 RR Type RDATA 131 The SRV6 RR type enables the storage and retrieval of an ordered 132 sequence of SRv6 quantities each of which is the size of IPv6 133 [RFC8200] addresses. The RDATA for this type of RR is simple a 134 sequence of such quantities preceded by 16 bits that are available 135 for future definition as flags (see Figure 1) and will be 2+(N*16) 136 bytes long where N is the number of such quantities present. 138 The RR Type Code for the SRV6 RR is TBD1. 140 The Flags field is for future flexibility and MUST be sent as zero 141 and ignored on receipt. 143 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 144 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 145 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 146 | Flags | 147 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 148 | | 149 | 128-bit SRv6 Address/Instruction | 150 | | 151 | | 152 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 153 . . 154 . Additional 128-bit SRv6 Addresses/Instructions . 155 . . 156 ................................................................. 158 Figure 1: SRV6 RRTYPE Data 160 3. Acknowledgements 162 The suggestions and comments of the following persons are gratefully 163 acknowledged: 165 tbd 167 4. IANA Considerations 169 IANA is request to assign an SRV6 RR Type (TBD1) as in the template 170 in Appendix A. 172 5. Security Considerations 174 tbd 176 6. References 178 6.1. Normative References 180 [RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", 181 STD 13, RFC 1034, DOI 10.17487/RFC1034, November 1987, 182 . 184 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 185 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 186 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 187 . 189 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 190 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 191 May 2017, . 193 [RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 194 (IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200, 195 DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017, 196 . 198 [RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., 199 Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment 200 Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402, 201 July 2018, . 203 [RFC8986] Filsfils, C., Ed., Camarillo, P., Ed., Leddy, J., Voyer, 204 D., Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "Segment Routing over IPv6 205 (SRv6) Network Programming", RFC 8986, 206 DOI 10.17487/RFC8986, February 2021, 207 . 209 6.2. Informative References 211 [RFC0791] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791, 212 DOI 10.17487/RFC0791, September 1981, 213 . 215 [RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and 216 specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, DOI 10.17487/RFC1035, 217 November 1987, . 219 [RFC2782] Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P., and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for 220 specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782, 221 DOI 10.17487/RFC2782, February 2000, 222 . 224 [RFC3597] Gustafsson, A., "Handling of Unknown DNS Resource Record 225 (RR) Types", RFC 3597, DOI 10.17487/RFC3597, September 226 2003, . 228 [RFC8499] Hoffman, P., Sullivan, A., and K. Fujiwara, "DNS 229 Terminology", BCP 219, RFC 8499, DOI 10.17487/RFC8499, 230 January 2019, . 232 [RFC8754] Filsfils, C., Ed., Dukes, D., Ed., Previdi, S., Leddy, J., 233 Matsushima, S., and D. Voyer, "IPv6 Segment Routing Header 234 (SRH)", RFC 8754, DOI 10.17487/RFC8754, March 2020, 235 . 237 Appendix A. SRV6 RR Type Template 239 A. Submission Date: tbd 241 B.1 Submission Type: [X] New RRTYPE [ ] Modification to RRTYPE 242 B.2 Kind of RR: [X] Data RR [ ] Meta-RR 244 C. Contact Information for submitter (will be publicly posted): 245 Name: Donald Eastlake Email Address: d3e3e3@gmail.com 246 International telephone number: +1-508-333-2270 247 Other contact handles: 249 D. Motivation for the new RRTYPE application. 251 Need to store IPv6 Segment Routing sequences in the DNS. 253 E. Description of the proposed RR type. 254 See draft-eastlake-dnsop-rrtype-srv6 256 F. What existing RRTYPE or RRTYPEs come closest to filling that need 257 and why are they unsatisfactory? 259 Perhaps AAAA but that only returns a single IPv6 address, not an 260 ordered sequence of IPv6 sized SRv6 instructions. 262 G. What mnemonic is requested for the new RRTYPE (optional)? 264 SRV6 266 H. Does the requested RRTYPE make use of any existing IANA registry 267 or require the creation of a new IANA subregistry in DNS 268 Parameters? If so, please indicate which registry is to be used 269 or created. If a new subregistry is needed, specify the 270 allocation policy for it and its initial contents. 272 Does not use any existing registry (other than, of course, the RR 273 Type registry) and does not create a new registry. 275 I. Does the proposal require/expect any changes in DNS 276 servers/resolvers that prevent the new type from being processed 277 as an unknown RRTYPE (see [RFC3597])? 279 No. 281 J. Comments: None. 283 Authors' Addresses 284 Donald Eastlake 285 Futurewei Technologies 286 2386 Panoramic Circle 287 Apopka, FL 32703 288 United States of America 289 Phone: +1 508 333 2270 290 Email: d3e3e3@gmail.com 292 Haoyu Song 293 Futurewei Technologies 294 2220 Central Expressway 295 Santa Clara, CA 95050 296 United States of America 297 Email: haoyu.song@futurewei.com