idnits 2.17.1 draft-iab-2870bis-02.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 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The draft header indicates that this document obsoletes RFC2870, but the abstract doesn't seem to mention this, which it should. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year == The document seems to lack the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119 keywords. (The document does seem to have the reference to RFC 2119 which the ID-Checklist requires). -- The document date (February 14, 2015) is 3359 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Best Current Practice ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Unused Reference: 'RFC3172' is defined on line 183, but no explicit reference was found in the text -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 793 (Obsoleted by RFC 9293) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2460 (Obsoleted by RFC 8200) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2870 (Obsoleted by RFC 7720) Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 5 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group M. Blanchet 3 Internet-Draft Viagenie 4 Obsoletes: 2870 (if approved) L-J. Liman 5 Intended status: Best Current Practice Netnod 6 Expires: August 18, 2015 February 14, 2015 8 DNS Root Name Service Protocol and Deployment Requirements 9 draft-iab-2870bis-02.txt 11 Abstract 13 The DNS Root Name service is a critical part of the Internet 14 architecture. The protocol and deployment requirements expected to 15 be implemented for the DNS root name service are defined in this 16 document. Operational requirements are out of scope. 18 Status of This Memo 20 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 21 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 23 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 24 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 25 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 26 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 28 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 29 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 30 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 31 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 33 This Internet-Draft will expire on August 18, 2015. 35 Copyright Notice 37 Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 38 document authors. All rights reserved. 40 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 41 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 42 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 43 publication of this document. Please review these documents 44 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 45 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 46 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 47 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 48 described in the Simplified BSD License. 50 Table of Contents 52 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 53 1.1. RFC 2870 as Historic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 54 2. Protocol Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 55 3. Deployment Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 56 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 57 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 58 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 59 7. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 60 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 62 1. Introduction 64 [RFC2870] discusses protocol and operational requirements for root 65 name servers for Internet's domain name system(DNS) protocol 66 [RFC1035]. Since its publication, both protocol and operational 67 requirements have evolved. It makes more sense now to separate the 68 two sets of requirements into two separate documents. The 69 operational requirements are defined in [RSSAC-001]. This document 70 defines the protocol requirements and some deployment requirements. 72 The root servers are authoritative servers of the unique [RFC2826] 73 root zone (".")[ROOTZONE]. They currently also serve the root- 74 servers.net zone. Some also serve the zone for the .arpa top-level 75 domain[ARPAZONE]. This document describes the external interface of 76 the root name servers from a protocol viewpoint of the service. It 77 specifies basic requirements for the Internet that DNS clients meet 78 when interacting with a root name service over the public Internet. 80 The keywords MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD, 81 SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL, when they appear in this 82 document, are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, [RFC2119]. 84 1.1. RFC 2870 as Historic 86 This document obsoletes and reclassifies [RFC2870] as Historic. 88 This document and [RSSAC-001] together functionally replace 89 [RFC2870]. 91 2. Protocol Requirements 93 This section describes the minimum high-level protocol requirements. 94 Operative details are documented in [RSSAC-001] and implementation is 95 left to the operators of the root name service. 97 The root name service: 99 MUST implement core DNS [RFC1035] and clarifications to the DNS 100 [RFC2181]. 102 MUST support IPv4[RFC0791] and IPv6[RFC2460] transport of DNS 103 queries and responses. 105 MUST support UDP[RFC0768] and TCP[RFC0793] transport of DNS 106 queries and responses. 108 MUST generate checksums when sending UDP datagrams and MUST verify 109 checksums when receiving UDP datagrams containing a non-zero 110 checksum. 112 MUST implement DNSSEC[RFC4035], as an authoritative name service. 114 3. Deployment Requirements 116 The root name service: 118 MUST answer queries from any entity conforming to [RFC1122] with a 119 valid IP address. 121 MUST serve the unique [RFC2826] root zone[ROOTZONE]. 123 4. Security Considerations 125 This document does not specify a new protocol. However, the root 126 name service is a key component of the Internet architecture and play 127 a key role into the overall security of the Internet[RFC2826]. 128 Specific security considerations on the DNS protocols are discussed 129 in their respective specifications. The security considerations on 130 the operational side of the root name servers are discussed in 131 [RSSAC-001]. 133 5. IANA Considerations 135 This document has no action for IANA. 137 6. Acknowledgements 139 Some text was taken from [RFC2870]. The editors of this document 140 would like to sincerely thank the following individuals for valuable 141 contributions to the text: Andrew Sullivan, Simon Perreault, Jean- 142 Philippe Dionne, Dave Thaler, Russ Housley, Alissa Cooper, Joe Abley, 143 Joao Damas, Daniel Karrenberg, Jacques Latour, Eliot Lear, Bill 144 Manning, David Conrad, Paul Hoffman. 146 7. Informative References 148 [ARPAZONE] 149 Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), , ".ARPA Zone 150 Management", . 152 [RFC0768] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768, 153 August 1980. 155 [RFC0791] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791, September 156 1981. 158 [RFC0793] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", STD 7, RFC 159 793, September 1981. 161 [RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and 162 specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. 164 [RFC1122] Braden, R., "Requirements for Internet Hosts - 165 Communication Layers", STD 3, RFC 1122, October 1989. 167 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 168 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 170 [RFC2181] Elz, R. and R. Bush, "Clarifications to the DNS 171 Specification", RFC 2181, July 1997. 173 [RFC2460] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 174 (IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998. 176 [RFC2826] Internet Architecture Board, "IAB Technical Comment on the 177 Unique DNS Root", RFC 2826, May 2000. 179 [RFC2870] Bush, R., Karrenberg, D., Kosters, M., and R. Plzak, "Root 180 Name Server Operational Requirements", BCP 40, RFC 2870, 181 June 2000. 183 [RFC3172] Huston, G., "Management Guidelines & Operational 184 Requirements for the Address and Routing Parameter Area 185 Domain ("arpa")", BCP 52, RFC 3172, September 2001. 187 [RFC4035] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. 188 Rose, "Protocol Modifications for the DNS Security 189 Extensions", RFC 4035, March 2005. 191 [ROOTZONE] 192 "Root Zone", . 194 [RSSAC-001] 195 Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC), , "Service 196 Expectations of Root Servers", November 2014, 197 . 200 Authors' Addresses 202 Marc Blanchet 203 Viagenie 204 246 Aberdeen 205 Quebec, QC G1R 2E1 206 Canada 208 Email: Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca 209 URI: http://viagenie.ca 211 Lars-Johan Liman 212 Netnod Internet Exchange 213 Box 30194 214 SE-104 25 Stockholm 215 Sweden 217 Email: liman@netnod.se 218 URI: http://www.netnod.se/