Skip to main content

The Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) DNS Resource Record
draft-faltstrom-uri-14

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2015-06-02
14 (System) RFC Editor state changed to AUTH48-DONE from AUTH48
2015-05-11
14 (System) RFC Editor state changed to AUTH48 from RFC-EDITOR
2015-05-11
14 (System) RFC Editor state changed to RFC-EDITOR from EDIT
2015-03-30
14 (System) IANA Action state changed to RFC-Ed-Ack from Waiting on RFC Editor
2015-03-30
14 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on RFC Editor from Waiting on Authors
2015-03-26
14 Cindy Morgan IESG state changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent
2015-03-26
14 (System) RFC Editor state changed to EDIT
2015-03-26
14 (System) Announcement was received by RFC Editor
2015-03-26
14 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress
2015-03-26
14 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress from On Hold
2015-03-26
14 (System) IANA Action state changed to On Hold from In Progress
2015-03-26
14 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress
2015-03-25
14 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent from Approved-announcement to be sent
2015-03-25
14 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the document
2015-03-25
14 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2015-03-25
14 Amy Vezza Ballot approval text was generated
2015-03-25
14 Pete Resnick IESG state changed to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup
2015-03-25
14 Pete Resnick Ballot writeup was changed
2015-03-25
14 Barry Leiba [Ballot comment]
Version -14 addresses all my comments; thanks very much.
2015-03-25
14 Barry Leiba [Ballot Position Update] Position for Barry Leiba has been changed to Yes from Discuss
2015-03-25
14 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed
2015-03-25
14 Patrik Fältström IANA Review state changed to Version Changed - Review Needed from IANA OK - Actions Needed
2015-03-25
14 Patrik Fältström New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-14.txt
2015-03-19
13 Tero Kivinen Closed request for Last Call review by SECDIR with state 'No Response'
2015-03-12
13 Cindy Morgan IESG state changed to IESG Evaluation::Revised I-D Needed from IESG Evaluation
2015-03-12
13 Alia Atlas [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alia Atlas
2015-03-12
13 Richard Barnes [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Richard Barnes
2015-03-12
13 Joel Jaeggli [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Joel Jaeggli
2015-03-12
13 Jari Arkko [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Jari Arkko
2015-03-12
13 Benoît Claise [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Benoit Claise
2015-03-11
13 Martin Stiemerling [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Martin Stiemerling
2015-03-11
13 Stephen Farrell
[Ballot comment]

- General: Would it be ok or not of if _ftp._tcp had a value
with an sftp URI?  Could you state any rules …
[Ballot comment]

- General: Would it be ok or not of if _ftp._tcp had a value
with an sftp URI?  Could you state any rules for a) how
secure vs. insecure should be handled in the QNAME and b) if
there are security match/mismatch expectations between the
QNAME and the value of the RR? 

- s2: This reminds me of .well-known URIs that re-direct. I
know we're not focusing on the web though (but you did bring
it up) but the same effect for http can now be achieved that
way and it might be good to note

- 4.1: "DNS labels that occur in nature" - I love it:-)

- 5.1: I wondered what sftp would be here? would it be
_sftp._tcp or _ftp._ssh or _ftp._ssh._tcp or what?
2015-03-11
13 Stephen Farrell [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Stephen Farrell
2015-03-11
13 Ted Lemon [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Ted Lemon
2015-03-11
13 Barry Leiba
[Ballot discuss]
I find it odd that this document is all about URIs, and yet you don't cite RFC 3986 until the end of Section …
[Ballot discuss]
I find it odd that this document is all about URIs, and yet you don't cite RFC 3986 until the end of Section 7, and only make it an informative reference.  I think it has to be a normative reference and that it should be cited once when the term "URI" is first used in the Introduction, and again in Section 4.4 (see below).
2015-03-11
13 Barry Leiba
[Ballot comment]
-- Section 4.2 --

  URIs with the same priority SHOULD be tried in
  the order defined by the weight field.

The …
[Ballot comment]
-- Section 4.2 --

  URIs with the same priority SHOULD be tried in
  the order defined by the weight field.

The weight field doesn't define an order; it defines probabilistic selection criteria.  Probably something like this is more accurate:

NEW
  URIs with the same priority SHOULD be selected
  according to probabilities defined by the weight
  field.
END

As the weight field already has a "SHOULD" for selection (and you don't need two SHOULDs for the same thing), you might even simplify this more by removing the SHOULD here, as this:

NEW-2
  URIs with the same priority are selected
  according to the weight field.
END

-- Section 4.4 --

  The URI of the target, enclosed in double-quote characters ('"').
  Resolution of the URI is according to the definitions for the Scheme
  of the URI.

I think you need to say, here, that the URI is as specified in RFC 3986, using the character encoding conventions from that specification.  Otherwise, there might be uncertainty about things like allowable characters, percent-encoding, use of UTF-8, and so on (but see below, after I've read further).  And, as I say above, I think 3986 needs to be a normative reference.

  The Target MUST NOT be empty ("").

As Adrian was confused by this, maybe you could say it this way?:

NEW
  The Target MUST NOT be an empty URI ("").
END

-- Section 4.5 --

  The Target field can also contain an IRI

You just contradicted Section 4.4, which says that the Target is a URI.  If the Target is a URI *or* an IRI, then that needs to be said in Section 4.4, with suitable references to both, and with the restrictions specified there.  Happily (or not), you already have 3987 as a normative reference.

I say "(or not)" because I *really* wish we weren't allowing these to be IRIs.  I really wish we required that these be converted to and stored as IRIs in the DNS record.  But, as you're documenting current usage here, I'm not sure that ship can be retooled at this point; sigh.
2015-03-11
13 Barry Leiba [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded for Barry Leiba
2015-03-10
13 Spencer Dawkins [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Spencer Dawkins
2015-03-10
13 Kathleen Moriarty [Ballot comment]
This looks fine, I just found a typo in the security considerations section:

    will effectlyely lead to a downgrade attack.
s/effectlyely/effectively/
2015-03-10
13 Kathleen Moriarty [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Kathleen Moriarty
2015-03-10
13 Brian Haberman [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Brian Haberman
2015-03-09
13 Adrian Farrel
[Ballot comment]
You don't need to expand DNS and URI as they are well known.

On the other hand, you do need to expand:
DDDS …
[Ballot comment]
You don't need to expand DNS and URI as they are well known.

On the other hand, you do need to expand:
DDDS
NAPTR                         

---

I am uneasy with your use of 2119 language in this document...


The use of "MUST" in section 2 is inappropriate. It would be better to
say "must" and even better to say "need to". And the use of "MUST NOT"
would read better as "is not".



Since this is an Informational document, the 2119 language in 4.2 is
out of place.  Are you defining new procedures, quoting procedures
documented elsewhere, or making commentary? I think you could write...

  The priority of the target URI in this RR.  Its range is 0-65535.  A
  client attempts to contact the URI with the lowest-numbered priority
  it can reach; URIs with the same priority are tried in the order
  defined by the weight field.



Section 4.4's use of "MUST" is more debatable.

  The Target MUST NOT be empty ("").

Where does this rule come from and why? Is it a specific case of an
existing rule, or are you defining something new?


And so on...
2015-03-09
13 Adrian Farrel [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Adrian Farrel
2015-03-06
13 (System) IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - Actions Needed from Version Changed - Review Needed
2015-03-06
13 Pete Resnick IESG state changed to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead::AD Followup
2015-03-06
13 Pete Resnick Ballot has been issued
2015-03-06
13 Pete Resnick [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Pete Resnick
2015-03-06
13 Pete Resnick Created "Approve" ballot
2015-03-06
13 Pete Resnick Ballot writeup was changed
2015-03-06
13 Patrik Fältström New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-13.txt
2015-03-05
12 Jean Mahoney Request for Telechat review by GENART is assigned to Suresh Krishnan
2015-03-05
12 Jean Mahoney Request for Telechat review by GENART is assigned to Suresh Krishnan
2015-03-04
12 Paul Hoffman
Shepherd writeup for draft-faltstrom-uri

1. Summary

Paul Hoffman is the document shepherd, and Pete Resnick is the responsible Area Director.

This document defines a new …
Shepherd writeup for draft-faltstrom-uri

1. Summary

Paul Hoffman is the document shepherd, and Pete Resnick is the responsible Area Director.

This document defines a new DNS resource record type for publishing mappings from hostnames to URIs.
In addtion, the document updates RFCs 3404 and 3958, which relate to the Dynamic Delegation
Discovery System (DDDS). The new resource record has a simple resource record data format which has
a numeric priority, numeric weight, and a target URI/IRI.

2. Review and Consensus

The document was discussed briefly in the Apps Area WG and the DNSOP WG, and the now-closed DNSEXT
WG, with no significant objections. The registration for the new resource record type was already
approved by the expert reviewer a few years ago.

During IETF Last Call, some commenters wanted the Security Considerations section beefed up to indicate
problems with using the URI with security-aware protocols that expected to match the host name with the one
extracted from the URI in the new type. Also, there were questions about the need to update the definitions
for NAPTR records. The authors dealt with both of these issues in the -12 version of the draft.

3. Intellectual Property

Both authors have stated that they do not know of any relevant IPR for this document.

4. Other Points

The draft is pretty simple, and has been rolling around for many years with only minor
modifications. It is already implemented in some widely-used DNS software.
2015-03-04
12 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed
2015-03-04
12 Patrik Fältström IANA Review state changed to Version Changed - Review Needed from IANA OK - Actions Needed
2015-03-04
12 Patrik Fältström New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-12.txt
2015-03-01
11 Gunter Van de Velde Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR Completed: Has Nits. Reviewer: Suzanne Woolf.
2015-02-27
11 Pete Resnick Changed consensus to Yes from Unknown
2015-02-27
11 Pete Resnick Intended Status changed to Informational from Proposed Standard
2015-02-27
11 Pete Resnick Document to be changed in light of Last Call comments to simply describe the registration, and will be put forward for Informational.
2015-02-27
11 Pete Resnick IESG state changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead::Revised I-D Needed from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead
2015-02-27
11 Pete Resnick Telechat date has been changed to 2015-03-12 from 2015-03-05
2015-02-25
11 Jean Mahoney Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Suresh Krishnan
2015-02-25
11 Jean Mahoney Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Suresh Krishnan
2015-02-24
11 (System) IESG state changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call
2015-02-23
11 (System) IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - Actions Needed from IANA - Review Needed
2015-02-19
11 Patrik Fältström New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-11.txt
2015-01-31
10 Gunter Van de Velde Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR is assigned to Suzanne Woolf
2015-01-31
10 Gunter Van de Velde Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR is assigned to Suzanne Woolf
2015-01-29
10 Tero Kivinen Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Melinda Shore
2015-01-29
10 Tero Kivinen Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Melinda Shore
2015-01-28
10 Jean Mahoney Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Suresh Krishnan
2015-01-28
10 Jean Mahoney Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Suresh Krishnan
2015-01-27
10 Pete Resnick Placed on agenda for telechat - 2015-03-05
2015-01-27
10 Cindy Morgan IANA Review state changed to IANA - Review Needed
2015-01-27
10 Cindy Morgan
The following Last Call announcement was sent out:

From: The IESG
To: IETF-Announce
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
Sender:
Subject: Last Call:  (The Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) DNS …
The following Last Call announcement was sent out:

From: The IESG
To: IETF-Announce
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
Sender:
Subject: Last Call:  (The Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) DNS Resource Record) to Proposed Standard


The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'The Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) DNS Resource Record'
  as Proposed Standard

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2015-02-24. Exceptionally, comments may be
sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

Abstract


  This document defines a new DNS resource record, called the Uniform
  Resource Identifier (URI) RR, for publishing mappings from hostnames
  to URIs.

  This document updates RFC 3404 and RFC 3958.




The file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-faltstrom-uri/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-faltstrom-uri/ballot/


No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.


2015-01-27
10 Cindy Morgan IESG state changed to In Last Call from Last Call Requested
2015-01-27
10 Pete Resnick Last call was requested
2015-01-27
10 Pete Resnick Ballot approval text was generated
2015-01-27
10 Pete Resnick IESG state changed to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation::External Party
2015-01-27
10 Pete Resnick Last call announcement was generated
2015-01-27
10 Pete Resnick Last call announcement was generated
2015-01-27
10 Pete Resnick Ballot writeup was changed
2015-01-27
10 Pete Resnick Ballot writeup was generated
2015-01-25
10 Paul Hoffman
Shepherd writeup for draft-faltstrom-uri-10

1. Summary

Paul Hoffman is the document shepherd, and Pete Resnick is the responsible Area Director.

This document defines a new …
Shepherd writeup for draft-faltstrom-uri-10

1. Summary

Paul Hoffman is the document shepherd, and Pete Resnick is the responsible Area Director.

This document defines a new DNS resource record type for publishing mappings from hostnames to URIs.
In addtion, the document updates RFCs 3404 and 3958, which relate to the Dynamic Delegation
Discovery System (DDDS). The new resource record has a simple resource record data format which has
a numeric priority, numeric weight, and a target URI/IRI.

2. Review and Consensus

The document was discussed briefly in the Apps Area WG and the DNSOP WG, and the now-closed DNSEXT
WG, with no significant objections. The registration for the new resource record type was already
approved by the expert reviewer a few years ago.

3. Intellectual Property

Both authors have stated that they do not know of any relevant IPR for this document.

4. Other Points

The draft is pretty simple, and has been rolling around for many years with only minor
modifications. It is already implemented in some widely-used DNS software.
2015-01-25
10 Patrik Fältström New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-10.txt
2015-01-24
09 Pete Resnick Assigned shepherding duties to Paul Hoffman. He's going to do a writeup and proceed to kick my butt out of letting this languish.
2015-01-24
09 Pete Resnick IESG state changed to AD Evaluation::External Party from AD Evaluation
2015-01-24
09 Pete Resnick Notification list changed to kolkman@isoc.org, paf@netnod.se, draft-faltstrom-uri@tools.ietf.org, "Paul E. Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> from kolkman@isoc.org, paf@netnod.se, draft-faltstrom-uri@tools.ietf.org
2015-01-24
09 Pete Resnick Document shepherd changed to Paul E. Hoffman
2014-08-11
09 Pete Resnick IESG state changed to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested
2014-08-08
09 Patrik Fältström New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-09.txt
2014-07-31
08 Pete Resnick State Change Notice email list changed to kolkman@isoc.org, paf@netnod.se, draft-faltstrom-uri@tools.ietf.org
2014-07-31
08 Pete Resnick IESG process started in state Publication Requested
2014-07-31
08 Naveen Khan
2014-07-31
08 Pete Resnick Notification list changed to : kolkman@isoc.org, paf@frobbit.se
2014-07-31
08 Pete Resnick Intended Status changed to Proposed Standard from None
2014-07-31
08 Pete Resnick Stream changed to IETF from None
2014-07-31
08 Pete Resnick Shepherding AD changed to Pete Resnick
2014-07-31
08 Pete Resnick Resurrection was requested
2013-07-05
08 Patrik Fältström New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-08.txt
2013-01-22
07 Patrik Fältström New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-07.txt
2011-04-14
06 (System) Document has expired
2010-10-11
06 (System) New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-06.txt
2010-06-24
05 (System) New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-05.txt
2009-05-23
04 (System) New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-04.txt
2009-05-23
03 (System) New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-03.txt
2008-11-03
02 (System) New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-02.txt
2008-07-14
01 (System) New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-01.txt
2008-02-18
00 (System) New version available: draft-faltstrom-uri-00.txt