ANIMA WG T. Eckert
Internet-Draft Futurewei
Intended status: Standards Track M. Boucadair
Expires: January 13, 2022 C. Jacquenet
Orange
M. Behringer
July 12, 2021
DNS-SD Compatible Service Discovery in GeneRic Autonomic Signaling
Protocol (GRASP)
draft-eckert-anima-grasp-dnssd-02
Abstract
DNS Service Discovery (DNS-SD) defines a framework for applications
to announce and discover services. This includes service names,
service instance names, common parameters for selecting a service
instance (weight or priority) as well as other service-specific
parameters. For the specific case of autonomic networks, GeneRic
Autonomic Signaling Protocol (GRASP) intends to be used for service
discovery in addition to the setup of basic connectivity.
Reinventing advanced service discovery for GRASP with a similar set
of features as DNS-SD would result in duplicated work. To avoid
that, this document defines how to use GRASP to announce and discover
services relying upon DNS-SD features while maintaining the intended
simplicity of GRASP. To that aim, the document defines name
discovery and schemes for reusable elements in GRASP objectives.
Note to the RFC Editor
Please replace all occurrences of rfcXXXX with the RFC number
assigned to this document.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 13, 2022.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Service and Name Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Objective Value Reuseable Elements Structure . . . . . . 4
3.3. Reuseable Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3.1. Sender Loop Count . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3.2. Service Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3.3. Name Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Theory of Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.1. Using GRASP Service Announcements . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.2. Further Comparison with DNS-SD . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.3. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
9. Change log [RFC Editor: Please remove] . . . . . . . . . . . 15
9.1. 02 - Revived after charter round 1 finished . . . . . . . 15
9.2. 01 - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
9.3. 00 - Initial version . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
1. Overview
DNS Service Discovery (DNS-SD) [RFC6763] defines a framework for
applications to announce and discover services. This includes
service names, service instance names, common parameters for
selecting a service instance (weight, priority) as well as other
service-specific parameters.
GeneRic Autonomic Signaling Protocol (GRASP) [RFC8990] is intended to
also be used for service discovery purposes. Reinventing service
discovery for GRASP with a similar set of features would result in
duplication of work. Therefore, this document defines how to use
GRASP to announce and discover services in a way that inherits DNS-SD
features and also tries to be compatible in spirit as much as
possible while still maintaining the intended simplicity of GRASP.
The goal of this document is to permit defining service and their
parameters once and then use that in GRASP, mDNS and (unicast) DNS.
Future work can also define DNS-SD <-> GRASP gateway functions.
This document primarily defines how to perform service discovery
across such a GRASP domain leveraging GRASP's options to perform
unsolicited flooding of announcements or flooding of requests, and
finding the closest service instances. Also, the document allows for
automatically discovering DNS-SD servers. Such features is meant to
optimize the flooding traffic in some deployments.
The initial use case of this document is to support what in DNS-SD is
done via mDNS but in larger networks - GRASP-Domains. Beside the
efficient flooding, GRASP provides reliability and security, which
are depending on the so called substrate used by GRASP for security
and hop-by-hop/end-to-end transport, such as the Autonomic control
plane (ACP), [RFC8994]. Providing compatibility with existing mDNS
service announcer or clients is possible, but not described in this
version of the document.
The encoding of information chosen in this document does not try to
use GRASP solely as a transport layer, but to also leverage the CBOR
structure of GRASP messages to natively encode the message elements
required for services in a way that is most simple - instead of using
GRASP only as, e.g., an encapsulation of otherwise unchanged DNS
message encodings. This is done to minimize the amount of coding
required (and not require any DNS code unless future gateway
functions are required), to increase the simplicity, minimize the
amount of data on the wire, and allow easier extensibility. On the
downside, the mechanisms provided here do not cover the whole slew of
possible options of DNS/DNS-SD, but instead only those deemed to be
required. Others can be added later.
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
In support of service discovery, this document also defines name
discovery and schemes for reusable elements in GRASP objectives which
are designed to be extensible so that future work that identifies
elements required across multiple objectives do not need to define a
scheme how to do this.
2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
This document makes use of terms and concepts defined in [RFC8990].
3. Specification
3.1. Service and Name Objectives
Unsolicited, flooded announcements (M_FLOOD) in GRASP and solicited
flooded discovery (M_DISCOVERY) operate on the unit of GRASP
technical objectives (identified by 'objective-names' as discussed in
Section 2.10 of [RFC8990]). Therefore, a scheme is required to
indicate services via 'objective-names'.
Note: Future work may want to reuse the encodings related to
services (defined below in this document) inside other (multicast
or unicast only) objective exchanges, in which case the service
names are not impacted.
When a technical objective (simply referred to as objective) is meant
to be solely about a service name, the objective MUST uses an
'objective-name' of 'SRV.<service-name>'. This naming scheme is
meant to avoid creating duplicates and, potentially, inconsistent
name registrations for those objectives vs. registrations done, for
example, for DNS-SD.
When an objective is meant announcement and discovery of a DNS
compatible <name> such as "www-internal" in "www-
internal.example.com", the objective SHOULD use an objective-name of
NAME.<name>. See Section 3.3.3 for more details.
3.2. Objective Value Reuseable Elements Structure
Because service discovery, as explained in the prior section, needs
to utilize different objectives, it requires cross-objective
standardized encoding of the elements of services. GRASP does not
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
define standardized message elements for the message body (called
"objective-value") of GRASP messages. Therefore, this document
introduces such a feature.
objective-value /= { 1*elements }
elements //= ( @rfcXXXX: { 1*relement } )
relement = ( relement-codepoint => relement-value )
relement-codepoint = uint
relement-value = any
If an objective relies upon reusable elements, the 'objective-value'
MUST be a CBOR map and the reusable elements are found under the key
"@rfcXXXX".
Objectives that do not want reusable elements may use any objective-
value format including a CBOR map, but they can not use the
"@rfcXXXX" key if they use a map. This approach was chosen as the
hopefully least intrusive mechanism given how by nature all of
"objective-value" is meant to be defined by individual objective
definitions.
The value of "@rfcXXXX" is a map of reusable elements. Each
'relement' has an IANA registered element-name and codepoint (see
Section 6). The element-name is for documentation purposes only,
CBOR encodings only use the numeric codepoint for encoding efficiency
to minimize the risk for this solution to not be applicable to low-
bitrate networks such as in IoT.
Format and semantic of the relement-value is determined by the
specification of the reusable element as is the fact whether more
than one instances of the same reusable element are permitted.
Reusable elements should be defined to be extensible. The methods
used depend on the complexity of the element and the likely need to
extend/modify the element with backward or non-backward compatible
information. The following is a set of initial options to choose
from:
Element values that are a map MUST permit and reserve key value 0
(numerical) for private extensions of the element defined by the
individual objective.
Element values that are a map MUST NOT use bareword key values
starting with a "_". These too are for private extensions defined by
the individual objective.
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
Element values SHOULD be defined so that additional keys in maps and
additional elements at the end of arrays can be ignored by prior
versions of the definition. Whenever a newer definition is made for
an element where this rule is violated, the element SHOULD be changed
in a way for older version recipients to recognize that it is not
compatible with it.
One method to indicate compatibility is a traditional version
"<mayor>.<minor>". Within the same <mayor> version number,
increasing <minor> version numbers must be backward compatible.
Different <mayor> version numbers are not expected to be compatible
with each other. If they are, then this can be indicated by
including multiple version numbers.
A compressed form of version compatibility information is the use of
a simple bitmask element where each bit indicates a version that the
represented data is compatible with.
3.3. Reuseable Elements
3.3.1. Sender Loop Count
relement-codepoint //= ( &(sender-loop-count:1) => 1..255 )
Sender-loop-count is set by the sender of an objective message to the
same value as the loop-count of the message. On receipt, distance =
( sender-loop-count - loop-count ) is the distance of the sender from
the receiver in hops. This element can be used for informational
purposes in M_FLOOD and M_DISCOVERY messages and may be required to
be used in these messages by the specification of other elements
(such as the service element described below). This element MUST
occur at most once. If a receiver expects to use the distance but
sender-loop-count was not announced, then distance SHOULD be assumed
to be 255 by the receiver.
3.3.2. Service Element
The srv-element (service element) is a reusable element to request or
announce a service instance or to request and list service instance
names.
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
relement-codepoint //= ( &(srv-element:2) => context-element )
context-element = {
?( &(private:0) => any),
?( &(msg-type:1 => msg-type),
?( &(service:2) => tstr),
*( &(instance:3) => tstr),
?( &(domain:4) => tstr),
?( &(priority:5) => 0..65535 ),
?( &(weight:6) => 0..65535 ),
*( &(kvpairs:7) => { *(tstr: any) },
?( &(range:8) => 0..255 ),
*( &(clocator:9) => clocator),
}
clocator = [ context, locator-option ]
context = cstr
locator-option = ; from GRASP
msg-type = &( describe: 0, describe-request:1,
enumerate:2, enumerate-request:3 )
Service: A service name registered according to RFC6335. If it is
not present, then objective-name MUST be SRV.<service-name> where
<service-name> is the service-name.
Instance: The <Instance> of a DNS-SD Service Instance Name (
<Instance> . <Service> . <Domain>). It is optional, see
Section 4.2.
Domain: The equivalent of the <Domain> field of a DNS-SD Service
Instance Name. If domain is not present, this is equivalent to
".local" in DNS (as introduced by mDNS) and implies the unnamed
"local" domain, which is the GRASP domain across which the message
is transmitted.
Priority, Weight: Service Instance selection criteria as defined in
RFC2782. If either one is not present, its value defaults to 0.
Kvpairs: Map of key/value pairs that are service parameters in the
same format as the key/value pairs in TXT field(s) of DNS-SD TXT
records as defined in RFC6763, section 6.3.
Range: Allows to flexibly combine distance and priority/weight based
service selection according to the definition of distance in
Section 3.3.1.
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
If min-distance is the distance of the closest service announcer,
and min-range the range announced by it, then the recipient MUST
consider the priority/weight of all service announcers that are
not further away than (min-distance + min-range). If not
included, range defaults to 255.
If range is announced, the sender-loop-count element MUST also be
announced.
Clocator: The "contextual locator" allows to indicate zero or more
locators for the indicated service instance. The context element
indicates in which context the locator-option is to be resolved.
The reserved context value of "" (empty string) indicates the
GRASP domain used, aka: the "local" context in which the service
announcement is made. The reserved context value of "0" indicates
the default routing context of the announcing node. This is often
called "global table", "VRF 0" or "default VRF" on nodes using the
"VRF" abstraction. Any other value is a string specifying a
context such as another VRF.
The mechanism by which originator and recipient of the srv-element
agree on common naming for contexts is outside the scope of this
specification. The context therefore allows to indicate locators
both for the context through which the GRASP message distributed
the srv-element (GRASP domain) as well as that for other contexts.
Assume the GRASP domain is the ACP, then clocators in ACP would
have a context of "", clocators in the global routing table (part
of the data-plane) a context of "0", and clocators on other VRFs
(also part of data-plane) a clocator that is their string name.
If no locators are indicated, then the locator of the service(s)
is the optional locator-option of the GRASP message in which the
objective is contained meant to be used for the service(s)
indicated and the clocator implied is "".
If locator(s) are indicated, the messages location-option must be
ignored for the service (but may be necessary to be present for
other purposes of the objective).
Msg-type Type (aka: intention) of the srv-element. If not present,
it is assumed to be "describe".
Describe: Describes one service instance. At least one clocator is
required for a positive response, all other fields are permitted,
but optional. "Describe" is used in M_FLOOD for unsolicited
announcements of services (flooded), in M_RESPONSE messages for
solicited announcements of a service and in M_NEGOTIATE for
negotiated announcements (both unicasted). If clocator is not
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
included, then all fields except service and instance (and msg-
type and private) must not be included and the srv-element
provides a negative reply: No information about this service/
service instance. This is only permitted in unicasted "describe"
messages.
Describe-request: Request for a "describe" reply. It is used in
M_DISCOVERY (flooded) for solicited discovery of services or in
M_REQ_SYN (unicasted) for negotiated discovery of service
instance(s). In "describe-request", only service is mandatory
(but can be provided via the objective-name field of the message),
and domain is optional. "Instance" is optional. If provided,
then the recipient is asked to provide information about the named
instance only. All other fields of srv-element are to be ignored
by the receiver in this specification, but a semantic for setting
them may be introduced in follow-up work, specifically to filter
replies by the indicated fields.
"Describe-request" without instance MAY be answered by "Enumerate"
(see below) if the responder has so many instances that it thinks
the initiator should rather first select one or fewer instances
and ask for their description. The sender of te "Describe-
request" MUST be prepared to accept that answer and as necessary
follow up with "Describe-request" with the instance names of
interest.
Enumerate: Used in the same GRASP messages as "describe", but
instead of providing information about one service instance, it is
listing service instance names. The purpose of enumerate is the
same as browsing a service in DNS-SD. It would be followed by
some human or automated selection of one or more instances and
then a "describe" M_REQ_SYN request for those instances sent to
the source of the "enumerate" to learn about the locators and
other parameters of the service instances.
In this specification, all fields other than service, instance and
domain (and msg-type and private) must be unset in "enumerate".
Enumerate-request: Requests an "enumerate" reply. It is used in the
same way as "Describe-request" except that instance would usually
not be set (because in that case it is more useful to send a
"Describe-request").
3.3.3. Name Element
The NAME,<name> elements is meant to provide basic name resolution
comparable to mDNS name resolution for GRASP domains where this is
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
desirable and no better name resolution exist - for example in the
ACP where there is no requirement for DNS.
Because the GRASP service lookup (unlike) DNS does not mandate that
nodes have names (not even service instance names), the use of names
is primarily meant to support legacy software. New designs should
instead look up only services and service instance names, and nodes
should announce their names as service instance names for the
services they offer:
For example consider a GRASP (ACP) domain of "example.com". The node
providing some "www" service could have a name "www-internal" which
means GRASP objective NAME.www-internal, that objective value would
include primarily the nodes IP address(es) and the port number for
the www service would have to be guessed (80). Better, the node
would announce GRASP objective SRV.www and the objective value would
include the service instance name www-internal and the (TCP) port
information (80 or a non-default port).
relement-codepoint //= ( &(name-element:3) => context-element )
context-element //= {
*( &name:10) => tstr),
}
ipv6-address-option = [O_IPv4_ADDRESS, ipv6-address]
ipv4-address-option = [O_IPv6_ADDRESS, ipv6-address]
locator-option /= ipv4-address-option
locator-option /= ipv6-address-option
Name information is carried in the name-element relement. It is a
context-element like the one used for srv-element except that it adds
the name component and that it does not permit the service and
instance components and that it allows only describe and describe-
request values in the msg-type. Clocators MUST use the ipv6-address-
option or ipv4-address-option in the locator-option component.
TBD: Unclear if/how we should best formalize the differences in the
context element permitted information between services and names.
The above is quite informal.
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
Priority, weight, kvpairs, range (and of course private) MAY be used
in describe messages to support multiple instances of the same name,
as used for name anycast/prioritycast.
Nodes may have multiple names. These can be listed in the name
component. If a nodes names have the notion of a primary name and
secondary names then the primary name should be the first in the list
of names. In DNS-SD, the name pointed to by CNAME RRs can be
considered to be the primary name. A describe-request for a non-
primary name SHOULD return in the list of names the requested name
and the primary name.
Note that there is no reverse lookup defined in this version of the
document (no lookup from IP address to name).
4. Theory of Operation
4.1. Using GRASP Service Announcements
TBD: This section contains a range of details that should become
normative in later versions.
This section provides a step by step walk-through of how to use GRASP
service announcements and compares it to DNS-SD.
The most simple method to use GRASP service discovery is to select
(and if still necessary, register) a <service-name> and start one or
more agents (e.g.: ASAs) announcing their service instance(s) via
GRASP. At minimum, an agent should periodically (default 60 seconds)
announce the service instance via GRASP M_FLOOD messages as an
objective SRV.<service-name> with a srv-element and a sender-loop-
count element (default 255). The ttl of the GRASP message should be
3.5 times the announcement period, e.g.: 210000 msec.
Consumers of the service will use GRASP to learn of the service
instances and select one. This approach is most similar to the use
of DNS-SD with mDNS except that the scope of the announcement is a
whole GRASP domain (such as the ACP) as opposed to a single IP subnet
in mDNS and that mDNS primarily relies on request & reply but in its
standard not on periodic unsolicited announcements. We describe here
the unsolicited flooding option via M_FLOOD first because it is
recommended for services with a dense population of service consumers
and it is most simple to describe.
On the service announcer, the parameters priority, weight and range
of the service instance can be selected from intent or configuration
- or left at default. The default range 255 will result in selection
of a random target of the service like in DNS-SD. Setting priority/
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
weight allows to prioritize and weigh the selection as in DNS-SD.
Setting range to 0 allows to select the closest target, priority/
weight are only compared between targets of the same shortest
distance. Distance based options are not available in DNS-SD because
it does not expect that network distance is available to arbitrary
DNS-SD client. It is available to GRASP clients though. Using 0 <
range < 255 allows for a hybrid priority/weight and distance based
service selection (e.g.: Select the highest priority instance within
a range of 5 hops).
If the service is a non-GRASP service, then the result of the service
discovery has to be a transport locator to which the client can open
a connection and talk the protocol implied by the service. This
transport locator(s) have to be put into the clocator parameter. The
context of the clocator would normally be "", aka: the transport
locator is in the IP reachability associated with the GRASP domain
(e.g.: IPv6 of the ACP for ACP GRASP domain).
If an ACP service is announced via ACP GRASP, then the locator(s) can
be O_IPv6_LOCATOR or O_FQDN_LOCATOR. The O_IPv6_LOCATOR is used if
the service is defined to be available via some transport layer port
(TCP, UDP or other). The determination of the actual transport
connection to be used is the same as in DNS-SD: If the transport
protocol is not TCP or UDP, it has to be implied by the specification
of <service-name> or can be detailed in kvpairs which carries the
same information as DNS-TXT TXT RRs of the service. Alternatively,
the transport-proto field of the locator can contain any valid IP
protocol directly (TBD), which is not possible in DNS-SD.
Like DNS-SD, service discovery via GRASP does not require allocation
and use of well-known ports for services. Unlike DNS-SD, there is no
need in GRASP to define service instance names or target names. In
DNS SD, PTR RRs resolve from a service name to a set of service
instance named. SRV and TXT RRs resolve from service instance names
to service instance parameters including the target. A target is the
DNS host name of the service instance. It gets resolved via A/AAAA
RRs to IPv4/IPv6 addresses of the target. In GRASP service
discovery, host names are not used. Service instance names are
optional too. Service instance names are useful for human
diagnostics and human selection of service instances. In fully
automated environments, they can be are less important. For
diagnostic purposes, it is recommended to give service instances
service instance names in GRASP service announcements.
A locator with O_URI_LOCATOR type can be used in GRASP to indicate a
URI for the transport method for a service instance. If the URI
includes a host part, care must be taken to use only IP addresses in
the host part if the context of the GRASP domain does not support
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
host name resolution - such as the ACP - or to use the GRASP name
resolution mechanisms described elsewhere in this document. And that
the addresses indicated are also reachable in the GRASP domain. For
example, in service announcements across a DULL GRASP domain, only
the IPv6 link-local addresses on that subnet must be used (this
applies equally when using the O_IPv6_LOCATOR).
Instead of using M_FLOOD to periodically announce service instances,
M_DISCOVERY can be used to actively query for service instances. The
msg-type type must then be "describe-request". Because no periodic
flooding is necessary, this solution is more lightweight for the
network when the number of requesting clients is small. Note though
that the M_DISCOVERY will terminate as soon as a provider of the
objective is found, so the service instances found will be based on
distance and therefore selection of instance by priority and weight
will not work equally well as with M_FLOOD. Consider for example a
central service instance in the NOC that should always be used (for
example for centralized operational diagnostics) unless the WAN
connection is broken, in which case distributed backup service
instances should be used. With the current logic of M_DISCOVERY this
is not possible.
4.2. Further Comparison with DNS-SD
Neither the GRASP SRV.* objective-name, the service name nor any
other parameter explicitly indicate the second label "_tcp" or "_udp"
of DNS-SD entries. DNS-SD, RFC6763 explains how this is an
unnecessary, historic artifact.
This version of the document does not define an equivalent to "_sub"
structuring of service enumeration.
This version of the document does not define mechanisms for reverse
resolution of arbitrary services: An inquirer may unicast M_SYNC_REC
to a node with a series of objectives with specific service names of
interest and describe-request, but there is no indication of "ANY"
service.
4.3. Open Issues
TBD: Examine limitations mentioned in "in this version of the text/
document".
TBD: The GRASP specification does currently only permit TCP and UDP
for the transport-proto element. This draft should expand the GRASP
definitions to permit any valid IP protocol. We just need to decide
whether this should only apply to the locator in the srv element or
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
also retroactive to the locator-option in GRASP messages (maybe not
there ?).
TBD: A fitting CBOR representation for a kvpair key without value
needs to be specified so that it can be distinguished from an empty
value as outlined in RFC6763 section 6.4.
TBD: In this version, every service/service-instance is an element by
itself. Future versions of this document may add more encoding
options to allow more compact encoding of recurring fields.
TBD: Is there a way in CDDL to formally define the string names of
the relement-codepoint's ?
5. Security Considerations
TBD.
GRASP-related security issues are discussed in Section 3 of
[RFC8990].
6. IANA Considerations
This document requests IANA to create a new "GRASP Objective Value
Standard Elements" subregistry under the "GeneRic Autonomic Signaling
Protocol (GRASP) Parameters" registry.
The values in this table are names and a unique numerical value
assigned to each name. Future values MUST be assigned using the RFC
Required policy as dedfined in Section 4.7 of [RFC8126]. The
numerical value is simply to be assigned sequentially. The following
initial values are assigned by this document:
sender-loop-count 1 [defined in rfcXXXX]
srv-element 2 [defined in rfcXXXX]
name-element 3 [defined in rfcXXXX]
This document updates the handling of the "GRASP Objective Names"
Table introduced in the GRASP IANA considerations as follows:
Assignments for objective-names of the form "SRV.<text>" and
"NAME.<text>" are special.
Assignment of "SRV.<text>" can only be requested if <text> is also a
registered service-name according to RFC6335. The specification
required for registration of a "GRASP Objective Name" MUST declare
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
that the intended use of the objective name in GRASP is intended to
be compatible with the indented use of the registered service name.
Registration of "SRV.<text>" in the "GRASP Objective Name" table is
optional, but recommended for all new service-names that are meant to
be used with GRASP. Non-registration can for example happen with
DNS-SD <-> GRASP gateways that inject pre-existing service-names into
GRASP. Note that according to the GRASP RFC, registration is
mandatory, so this exemption for "SRV.<text>" is also an update to
that specification.
There MUST NOT be any assignment for objective names of the form
"NAME.<text>". These names are simply used by GRASP nodes without
registration (just like names in mDNS).
7. Acknowledgements
8. Contributors
Brian Carpenter
9. Change log [RFC Editor: Please remove]
9.1. 02 - Revived after charter round 1 finished
Reviving after ANIMA charter 01 is finished, adding new co-authors,
contributors.
Textual improvements, updating references.
9.2. 01 -
Only refreshing, no changes since -00.
9.3. 00 - Initial version
10. References
10.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC6763] Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "DNS-Based Service
Discovery", RFC 6763, DOI 10.17487/RFC6763, February 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6763>.
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8990] Bormann, C., Carpenter, B., Ed., and B. Liu, Ed., "GeneRic
Autonomic Signaling Protocol (GRASP)", RFC 8990,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8990, May 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8990>.
10.2. Informative References
[RFC8994] Eckert, T., Ed., Behringer, M., Ed., and S. Bjarnason, "An
Autonomic Control Plane (ACP)", RFC 8994,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8994, May 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8994>.
Authors' Addresses
Toerless Eckert
Futurewei Technologies USA
Inc.
2220 Central Expressway
Santa Clara 95050
USA
Email: tte+ietf@cs.fau.de
Mohamed Boucadair
Orange
Rennes 35000
France
Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
Christian Jacquenet
Orange
Rennes 35000
France
Email: christian.jacquenet@orange.com
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft DNS-SD via GRASP July 2021
Michael H. Behringer
Email: michael.h.behringer@gmail.com
Eckert, et al. Expires January 13, 2022 [Page 17]