draft-josefsson-dns-url-13.txt   draft-josefsson-dns-url.txt 
Network Working Group S. Josefsson Network Working Group S. Josefsson
Expires: February 6, 2006 Expires: February 2, 2006
Domain Name System Uniform Resource Identifiers Domain Name System Uniform Resource Identifiers
draft-josefsson-dns-url-13 draft-josefsson-dns-url-14
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
skipping to change at page 1, line 33 skipping to change at page 1, line 33
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on February 6, 2006. This Internet-Draft will expire on February 2, 2006.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
Abstract Abstract
This document define Uniform Resource Identifiers for Domain Name This document defines Uniform Resource Identifiers for Domain Name
System resources. System resources.
See <http://josefsson.org/dns-url/> for more information. See <http://josefsson.org/dns-url/> for more information.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction and Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction and Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Usage Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Usage Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. DNS URI Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. DNS URI Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. Copying conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 8. Copying conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Appendix A. Revision Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
A. Revision Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 A.1. Changes since -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
A.1 Changes since -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 A.2. Changes since -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
A.2 Changes since -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 A.3. Changes since -08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
A.3 Changes since -08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 A.4. Changes since -09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
A.4 Changes since -09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 A.5. Changes since -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
A.5 Changes since -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 A.6. Changes since -11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
A.6 Changes since -11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 A.7. Changes since -12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
A.7 Changes since -12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 A.8. Changes since -13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 14 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 14
1. Introduction and Background 1. Introduction and Background
The Domain Name System (DNS) [1] [2] is a widely deployed system used The Domain Name System (DNS) [1] [2] is a widely deployed system used
to, among other things, translate host names into IP addresses. to, among other things, translate host names into IP addresses.
Several protocols are using Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) to Several protocols are using Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) to
refer to data. By defining a URI scheme for DNS data, the gap refer to data. By defining a URI scheme for DNS data, the gap
between these two worlds are bridged. The DNS URI scheme defined between these two worlds are bridged. The DNS URI scheme defined
here can be used to reference any data stored in the DNS. here can be used to reference any data stored in the DNS.
Data browsers may support DNS URIs by forming DNS queries and render Data browsers may support DNS URIs by forming DNS queries and
DNS responses using HTML [14], similar to what is commonly done for rendering DNS responses using HTML [12], similar to what is commonly
FTP [6] resources. Applications that are Multipurpose Internet Mail done for FTP [6] resources. Applications that are Multipurpose
Extension (MIME) [7] aware may tag DNS data retrieve using this Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) [7] aware may tag DNS data retrieved
scheme with the text/dns or application/dns types as specified in using this scheme with the text/dns or application/dns types as
[18]. specified in [15].
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [3]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [3].
2. Usage Model 2. Usage Model
The reader is referred to section 1 of [5] for an in-depth discussion The reader is referred to section 1 of [5] for an in-depth discussion
of URI classifications. In particular, the reader is assumed to be of URI classifications. In particular, the reader is assumed to be
familiar with the "name" vs "locator" distinction. This section familiar with the disction between "name" and "locator". This
describe how the DNS URI scheme is intended to be used, and outline section describes how the DNS URI scheme is intended to be used, and
future work that may be required to use URIs with the DNS for some outlines future work that may be required to use URIs with the DNS
applications. for some applications.
The URI scheme described in this document focus on the data stored in The URI scheme described in this document focuses on the data stored
the DNS. As such, there is no provision to specify any of the fields in the DNS. As such, there is no provision to specify any of the
in the actual DNS protocol. This is intentional, so that the URI may fields in the actual DNS protocol. This is intentional, so that the
be used even in situations where the DNS protocol is not used URI may be used even in situations where the DNS protocol is not used
directly. Two examples for this is zone file editors and DNS-related directly. Two examples for this are zone file editors and DNS-
configuration files, which may use this URI scheme to identify data. related configuration files, which may use this URI scheme to
The application would not use the DNS protocol to resolve the URIs. identify data. The application would not use the DNS protocol to
resolve the URIs.
A limitation of this design is that it do not accommodate all A limitation of this design is that it does not accommodate all
protocol parameters within the DNS protocol. It is expected that for protocol parameters within the DNS protocol. It is expected that,
certain applications, a more detailed URI syntax that map more for certain applications, a more detailed URI syntax that maps more
closely to the DNS protocol may be required. However, such an URI closely to the DNS protocol may be required. However, such a URI
definition is not included in this document. This document specify a definition is not included in this document. This document specifies
URI that is primarily intended to name DNS resources, but it can also a URI that is primarily intended to name DNS resources, but it can
be used to locate said resources for simple (but common) also be used to locate said resources for simple, yet common,
applications. applications.
3. DNS URI Registration 3. DNS URI Registration
The section contain the registration template for the DNS URI scheme The section contains the registration template for the DNS URI scheme
in accordance with [13]. in accordance with [11].
URL scheme name: "dns". URL scheme name: "dns".
URL scheme syntax: A DNS URI designate a DNS resource record set, URL scheme syntax: A DNS URI designates a DNS resource record set,
referenced by domain name, class, type and optionally the authority. referenced by domain name, class, type and, optionally, the
The DNS URI follows the generic syntax from RFC 3986 [5], and is authority. The DNS URI follows the generic syntax from RFC 3986 [5],
described using ABNF [4]. Strings are not case sensitive and free and is described using ABNF [4]. Strings are not case-sensitive and
insertion of linear-white-space is not permitted. free insertion of linear-white-space is not permitted.
dnsurl = "dns:" [ "//" dnsauthority "/" ] dnsurl = "dns:" [ "//" dnsauthority "/" ]
dnsname ["?" dnsquery] dnsname ["?" dnsquery]
dnsauthority = host [ ":" port ] dnsauthority = host [ ":" port ]
; See RFC 3986 for the ; See RFC 3986 for the
; definition of "host" and "port". ; definition of "host" and "port".
dnsname = *pchar dnsname = *pchar
; See RFC 3986 for the ; See RFC 3986 for the
; definition of "pchar". ; definition of "pchar".
; The "dnsname" field may be a ; The "dnsname" field may be a
; "relative" or "absolute" name, ; "relative" or "absolute" name,
; as per RFC 1034 section 3.1. ; as per RFC 1034 section 3.1.
; Note further that an empty ; Note further that an empty
; "dnsname" value is to be ; "dnsname" value is to be
; interpreted as the root itself. ; interpreted as the root itself.
; See below on relative dnsname's. ; See below on relative dnsnames.
dnsquery = dnsqueryelement [";" dnsquery] dnsquery = dnsqueryelement [";" dnsquery]
dnsqueryelement = ( "CLASS=" dnsclassval ) / ( "TYPE=" dnstypeval ) dnsqueryelement = ( "CLASS=" dnsclassval ) / ( "TYPE=" dnstypeval )
; Each clause MUST NOT be used more ; Each clause MUST NOT be used more
; than once. ; than once.
dnsclassval = 1*digit / "IN" / "CH" / dnsclassval = 1*digit / "IN" / "CH" /
<Any IANA registered DNS class mnemonic> <Any IANA registered DNS class mnemonic>
dnstypeval = 1*digit / "A" / "NS" / "MD" / dnstypeval = 1*digit / "A" / "NS" / "MD" /
<Any IANA registered DNS type mnemonic> <Any IANA registered DNS type mnemonic>
Unless specified in the URI, the authority ("dnsauthority") is Unless specified in the URI, the authority ("dnsauthority") is
assumed to be locally known, the class ("dnsclassval") to be the assumed to be locally known, the class ("dnsclassval") to be the
Internet class ("IN"), and the type ("dnstypeval") to be the Address Internet class ("IN"), and the type ("dnstypeval") to be the Address
type ("A"). These default values match the typical use of DNS; to type ("A"). These default values match the typical use of DNS: to
look up addresses for host names. look up addresses for host names.
A dnsquery element MUST NOT contain more than one occurance of the A dnsquery element MUST NOT contain more than one occurrence of the
"CLASS" and "TYPE" fields. For example, both "dns: "CLASS" and "TYPE" fields. For example, both "dns:
example?TYPE=A;TYPE=TXT" and "dns:example?TYPE=A;TYPE=A" are invalid. example?TYPE=A;TYPE=TXT" and "dns:example?TYPE=A;TYPE=A" are invalid.
However, the fields may occur in any order, so that both "dns: However, the fields may occur in any order, so that both "dns:
example?TYPE=A;CLASS=IN" and "dns:example?CLASS=IN;TYPE=A" are valid. example?TYPE=A;CLASS=IN" and "dns:example?CLASS=IN;TYPE=A" are valid.
The digit representation of types and classes MAY be used when a The digit representation of types and classes MAY be used when a
mnemonic for the corresponding value is not well known (e.g., for mnemonic for the corresponding value is not well known (e.g., for
newly introduced types or classes), but SHOULD NOT be used for the newly introduced types or classes), but SHOULD NOT be used for the
types or classes defined in the DNS specification [2]. All types or classes defined in the DNS specification [2]. All
implementations MUST recognize the mnemonics defined in [2]. implementations MUST recognize the mnemonics defined in [2].
To avoid ambiguity, relative "dnsname" values (i.e., those not ending To avoid ambiguity, relative "dnsname" values (i.e., those not ending
with ".") are assumed to be relative to the root. For example, "dns: with ".") are assumed to be relative to the root. For example, "dns:
host.example" and "dns:host.example." both refer to the same owner host.example" and "dns:host.example." both refer to the same owner
name, namely "host.example.". Further, an empty "dnsname" value is name, namely "host.example.". Further, an empty "dnsname" value is
considered to be a degenerative form of a relative name, which refer considered to be a degenerative form of a relative name, which refers
to the root ("."). to the root (".").
To resolve a DNS URI using the DNS protocol [2] a query is created, To resolve a DNS URI using the DNS protocol, [2] a query is created,
using as input the dnsname, dnsclassval and dnstypeval from the URI using as input the dnsname, dnsclassval and dnstypeval from the URI
string (or the appropriate default values). If an authority string (or the appropriate default values). If an authority
("dnsauthority") is given in the URI string, this indicate the server ("dnsauthority") is given in the URI string, this indicates the
that should receive the DNS query, otherwise the default DNS server server that should receive the DNS query. Otherwise, the default DNS
should receive it. server should receive it.
Note that DNS URIs could be resolved by other protocols than the DNS Note that DNS URIs could be resolved by other protocols than the DNS
protocol, or by using the DNS protocol in some other way than as protocol, or by using the DNS protocol in some other way than as
described above (e.g., multicast DNS). DNS URIs do not require the described above (e.g., multicast DNS). DNS URIs do not require the
use of the DNS protocol, although it is expected to be the typical use of the DNS protocol, although it is expected to be the typical
usage. The previous paragraph only illustrate how DNS URIs are usage. The previous paragraph only illustrates how DNS URIs are
resolved using the DNS protocol. resolved using the DNS protocol.
A client MAY want to check that it understands the dnsclassval and A client MAY want to check that it understands the dnsclassval and
dnstypeval before sending a query, so that it will be able to dnstypeval before sending a query, so that it will be able to
understand the response. However, a typical example of a client that understand the response. However, a typical example of a client that
would not need to check dnsclassval and dnstypeval would be a proxy, would not need to check dnsclassval and dnstypeval would be a proxy
that would just treat the received answer as opaque data. that would just treat the received answer as opaque data.
Character encoding considerations: The characters are encoded as per Character encoding considerations: Characters are encoded as per RFC
RFC 3986 [5]. The DNS protocol do not consider character sets, it 3986 [5]. The DNS protocol does not consider character sets, it
simply transports opaque data. In particular, the "dnsname" field of simply transports opaque data. In particular, the "dnsname" field of
the DNS URI is to be considered an internationalized domain name the DNS URI is to be considered an internationalized domain name
(IDN) unaware domain name slot, in the terminology of [16]. The (IDN) unaware domain name slot, in the terminology of RFC3940 [14].
considerations for "host" and "port" are discussed in [5] The considerations for "host" and "port" are discussed in [5]
Because "." is used as the DNS label separator, an escaping mechanism Because "." is used as the DNS label separator, an escaping mechanism
is required to encode a "." that is part of a DNS label. The is required to encode a "." that is part of a DNS label. The
escaping mechanism is described in section 5.1 of RFC 1035. For escaping mechanism is described in section 5.1 of RFC 1035 [2]. For
example, a DNS label of "exa.mple" can be escaped as "exa\.mple" or example, a DNS label of "exa.mple" can be escaped as "exa\.mple" or
"exa\046mple". However, the URI specification disallow the "\" "exa\046mple". However, the URI specification disallows the "\"
character from occuring directly in URIs, so it must be escaped as character from occurring directly in URIs, so it must be escaped as
"%5c". The single DNS label "exa.mple" is thus encoded as "exa% "%5c". The single DNS label "exa.mple" is thus encoded as "exa%
5c.mple". The same mechanism can be used to encode other characters, 5c.mple". The same mechanism can be used to encode other characters,
for example "?" and ";". Note that "." and "%2e" are equivalent for example "?" and ";". Note that "." and "%2e" are equivalent
within dnsname, and are interchangable. within dnsname, and are interchangeable.
This URI specification allows all possible domain names to be encoded This URI specification allows all possible domain names to be
(of course following the encoding rules of [5]), however certain encoded, provided the encoding rules are observed per [5]), however
applications may restrict the set of valid characters. Care should certain applications may restrict the set of valid characters. Care
be taken so that invalid characters in these contexts does not cause should be taken so that invalid characters in these contexts does not
harm. In particular, host names in the DNS have certain cause harm. In particular, host names in the DNS have certain
restrictions. It is up to these application to limit this subset, restrictions. It is up to these application to limit this subset;
this URI scheme places no restrictions. this URI scheme places no restrictions.
Intended usage: Whenever DNS resources are useful to reference by Intended usage: Whenever it is useful for DNS resources to be
protocol independent identifiers, often when the data is more referenced by protocol-independent identifiers, this URI
important than the access method. Since software in general has specification is applicable. Often, this occurs when the data is
more important than the access method. Since software in general has
coped without this so far, it is not anticipated to be implemented coped without this so far, it is not anticipated to be implemented
widely, nor migrated to by existing systems, but specific solutions widely, nor migrated to by existing systems, but specific solutions
(especially security related) may find this appropriate. (especially security-related) may find this appropriate.
Applications and/or protocols which use this scheme: Security related Applications and/or protocols which use this scheme: Security-
software. DNS administration tools. Network programming packages. related software, DNS administration tools, and network programming
packages.
Interoperability considerations: The data referenced by this URI Interoperability considerations: The data referenced by this URI
scheme might be transferred by protocols that are not URI aware (such scheme might be transferred by protocols that are not URI aware (such
as the DNS protocol). This is not anticipated to have any serious as the DNS protocol). This is not anticipated to have any serious
interoperability impact though. interoperability impact.
Interoperability problems may occur if one entity understands a new Interoperability problems may occur if one entity understands a new
DNS class/type mnemonic and another entity do not understand it. DNS class/type mnemonic that another entity does not. This is an
This is an interoperability problem for DNS software in general, interoperability problem for DNS software in general, although it is
although it is not a major practical problem as the DNS types and not a major practical problem for current DNS deployments as the DNS
classes are fairly static. To guarantee interoperability types and classes are fairly static. To guarantee interoperability,
implementations can use integers for all mnemonics not defined in implementations can use integers for all mnemonics not defined in
[2]. [2].
Interaction with Binary Labels [12], or other extended label types, Interaction with Binary Labels [10] or other extended label types has
has not been analyzed. However, they appear to be infrequently used not been analyzed. However, they appear to be infrequently used in
in practice. practice.
Contact: simon@josefsson.org Contact: simon@josefsson.org
Author/Change Controller: simon@josefsson.org Author/Change Controller: simon@josefsson.org
4. Examples 4. Examples
A DNS URI is of the following general form. This is intended to A DNS URI is of the following general form. This is intended to
illustrate, not define, the scheme. illustrate, not define, the scheme:
dns:[//authority/]domain[?CLASS=class;TYPE=type] dns:[//authority/]domain[?CLASS=class;TYPE=type]
The following illustrate a URI for a resource with the absolute name The following illustrates a URI for a resource with the absolute name
"www.example.org.", the Internet (IN) class and the Address (A) type: "www.example.org.", the Internet (IN) class and the Address (A) type:
dns:www.example.org.?clAsS=IN;tYpE=A dns:www.example.org.?clAsS=IN;tYpE=A
Since the default class is IN, and the default type is A, the same Since the default class is IN, and the default type is A, the same
resource can be identified by a shorter URI, using a relative name: resource can be identified by a shorter URI using a relative name:
dns:www.example.org dns:www.example.org
The following illustrate a URI for a resource with the name The following illustrate a URI for a resource with the name
"simon.example.org", for the CERT type, in the Internet (IN) class: "simon.example.org" for the CERT type in the Internet (IN) class:
dns:simon.example.org?type=CERT dns:simon.example.org?type=CERT
The following illustrate a URI for a resource with the name The following illustrate a URI for a resource with the name
"ftp.example.org", in the Internet (IN) class and the address (A) "ftp.example.org", in the Internet (IN) class and the address (A)
type, but from the DNS authority 192.168.1.1 instead of the default type, but from the DNS authority 192.168.1.1 instead of the default
authority: authority:
dns://192.168.1.1/ftp.example.org?type=A dns://192.168.1.1/ftp.example.org?type=A
The following illustrate various escaping techniques. The owner name The following illustrates various escaping techniques. The owner
would be "world wide web.example\.domain.org" where "\." denote the name would be "world wide web.example\.domain.example" where "\."
character "." as part of a label, and "." denote the label separator: denotes the character "." as part of a label, and "." denotes the
label separator:
dns:world%20wide%20web.example%5c.domain.example?TYPE=TXT dns:world%20wide%20web.example%5c.domain.example?TYPE=TXT
The following illustrate a strange, but valid, DNS resource: The following illustrates a strange, but valid, DNS resource:
dns://fw.example.org/*.%20%00.example?type=TXT dns://fw.example.org/*.%20%00.example?type=TXT
5. Acknowledgments 5. Acknowledgments
Thanks to Stuart Cheshire, Donald Eastlake, Pasi Eronen, Bill Fenner, Thanks to Stuart Cheshire, Donald Eastlake, Pasi Eronen, Bill Fenner,
Ted Hardie, Russ Housley, Peter Koch, Andrew Main, Larry Masinter, Ted Hardie, Russ Housley, Peter Koch, Andrew Main, Larry Masinter,
Michael Mealling, Steve Mattson, Paul Vixie, Sam Weiler, and Bert Michael Mealling, Steve Mattson, Marcos Sanz, Jason Sloderbeck, Paul
Wijnen for comments and suggestions. The author acknowledges the RSA Vixie, Sam Weiler, and Bert Wijnen for comments and suggestions. The
Laboratories for supporting the work that led to this document. author acknowledges RSA Laboratories for supporting the work that led
to this document.
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
If a DNS URI references domains in the Internet DNS environment, both If a DNS URI references domains in the Internet DNS environment, both
the URI itself and the information referenced by the URI is public the URI itself and the information referenced by the URI is public
information. If a DNS URI is used within an "internal" DNS information. If a DNS URI is used within an "internal" DNS
environment, both the DNS URI and the data is referenced should be environment, both the DNS URI and the data is referenced should be
handled using the same considerations that apply to DNS data in the handled using the same considerations that apply to DNS data in the
environment. "internal" environment.
If information referenced by DNS URIs are used to make security If information referenced by DNS URIs are used to make security
decisions (examples of such data include, but is not limited to, decisions (examples of such data include, but is not limited to,
certificates stored in the DNS [10]), implementations may need to certificates stored in the DNS [9]), implementations may need to
employ security techniques such as Secure DNS [9], or even CMS [15] employ security techniques such as Secure DNS [16], CMS [13], or
or OpenPGP [8], to protect the data during transport. How to OpenPGP [8], to protect the data during transport. How to implement
implement this will depend on the usage scenario, and it is not up to this will depend on the usage scenario, and it is not up to this URI
this URI scheme to define how the data referenced by DNS URIs should scheme to define how the data referenced by DNS URIs should be
be protected. protected.
If applications accept unknown dnsqueryelement values (e.g., accepts If applications accept unknown dnsqueryelement values in a URI (e.g.,
the URI "dns:www.example.org?secret=value" without knowing what the URI "dns:www.example.org?secret=value") without knowing what the
"secret=value" dnsqueryelement means), a covert channel used to "secret=value" dnsqueryelement means, a covert channel used to "leak"
"leak" information may be enabled. The implications of covert information may be enabled. The implications of covert channels
channels should be understood by applications that accepts unknown should be understood by applications that accept unknown
dnsqueryelement values. dnsqueryelement values.
Slight variations, such as difference between upper and lower case in Slight variations, such as difference between upper and lower case in
the dnsname field, can be used as a covert channel to leak the dnsname field, can be used as a covert channel to leak
information. information.
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
The IANA is asked to register the DNS URI scheme, using the template The IANA is asked to register the DNS URI scheme, using the template
in section 3, in accordance with RFC 2717 [13]. in section 3, in accordance with RFC 2717 [11].
8. Copying conditions 8. Copying conditions
Copyright (c) 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 Simon Josefsson Copyright (c) 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 Simon Josefsson
Regarding this entire document or any portion of it, the author makes Regarding this entire document or any portion of it, the author makes
no guarantees and is not responsible for any damage resulting from no guarantees and is not responsible for any damage resulting from
its use. The author grants irrevocable permission to anyone to use, its use. The author grants irrevocable permission to anyone to use,
modify, and distribute it in any way that does not diminish the modify, and distribute it in any way that does not diminish the
rights of anyone else to use, modify, and distribute it, provided rights of anyone else to use, modify, and distribute it, provided
that redistributed derivative works do not contain misleading author that redistributed derivative works do not contain misleading author
or version information. Derivative works need not be licensed under or version information. Derivative works need not be licensed under
similar terms. similar terms.
9. References 9. References
9.1 Normative References 9.1. Normative References
[1] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", [1] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities",
STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987. STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987.
[2] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and [2] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
[3] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement [3] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[4] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax [4] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997. Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997.
[5] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform [5] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC 3986, Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC 3986,
January 2005. January 2005.
9.2 Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[6] Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "File Transfer Protocol", STD 9, [6] Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "File Transfer Protocol", STD 9,
RFC 959, October 1985. RFC 959, October 1985.
[7] Freed, N., Klensin, J., and J. Postel, "Multipurpose Internet [7] Freed, N., Klensin, J., and J. Postel, "Multipurpose Internet
Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures", Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures",
BCP 13, RFC 2048, November 1996. BCP 13, RFC 2048, November 1996.
[8] Callas, J., Donnerhacke, L., Finney, H., and R. Thayer, [8] Callas, J., Donnerhacke, L., Finney, H., and R. Thayer,
"OpenPGP Message Format", RFC 2440, November 1998. "OpenPGP Message Format", RFC 2440, November 1998.
[9] Eastlake, D., "Domain Name System Security Extensions", [9] Eastlake, D. and O. Gudmundsson, "Storing Certificates in the
RFC 2535, March 1999.
[10] Eastlake, D. and O. Gudmundsson, "Storing Certificates in the
Domain Name System (DNS)", RFC 2538, March 1999. Domain Name System (DNS)", RFC 2538, March 1999.
[11] Myers, M., Ankney, R., Malpani, A., Galperin, S., and C. Adams, [10] Crawford, M., "Binary Labels in the Domain Name System",
"X.509 Internet Public Key Infrastructure Online Certificate
Status Protocol - OCSP", RFC 2560, June 1999.
[12] Crawford, M., "Binary Labels in the Domain Name System",
RFC 2673, August 1999. RFC 2673, August 1999.
[13] Petke, R. and I. King, "Registration Procedures for URL Scheme [11] Petke, R. and I. King, "Registration Procedures for URL Scheme
Names", BCP 35, RFC 2717, November 1999. Names", BCP 35, RFC 2717, November 1999.
[14] Connolly, D. and L. Masinter, "The 'text/html' Media Type", [12] Connolly, D. and L. Masinter, "The 'text/html' Media Type",
RFC 2854, June 2000. RFC 2854, June 2000.
[15] Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)", RFC 3369, [13] Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)", RFC 3369,
August 2002. August 2002.
[16] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello, [14] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello,
"Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)", "Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)",
RFC 3490, March 2003. RFC 3490, March 2003.
[17] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646", [15] Josefsson, S., "Domain Name System Media Types", RFC 4027,
STD 63, RFC 3629, November 2003.
[18] Josefsson, S., "Domain Name System Media Types", RFC 4027,
April 2005. April 2005.
Author's Address [16] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. Rose,
"DNS Security Introduction and Requirements", RFC 4033,
Simon Josefsson March 2005.
Email: simon@josefsson.org
Appendix A. Revision Changes Appendix A. Revision Changes
Note to RFC editor: Remove this appendix before publication. Note to RFC editor: Remove this appendix before publication.
A.1 Changes since -06 A.1. Changes since -06
The MIME registration templates for text/dns and application/dns was The MIME registration templates for text/dns and application/dns was
removed, and will be defined in separate documents. removed, and will be defined in separate documents.
Improved discussion related to which mnemonics that must be Improved discussion related to which mnemonics that must be
supported. The interoperability problem that provoked the supported. The interoperability problem that provoked the
clarification is also mentioned. clarification is also mentioned.
Security consideration improvements. Security consideration improvements.
A.2 Changes since -07 A.2. Changes since -07
Author/Change Controller changed to author of this document, not Author/Change Controller changed to author of this document, not
IESG. Terminology section collapsed into introduction. The second IESG. Terminology section collapsed into introduction. The second
paragraph of the introduction rewritten and gives explicit examples. paragraph of the introduction rewritten and gives explicit examples.
Intended usage and applications fields fixed. Moved this revision Intended usage and applications fields fixed. Moved this revision
tracking information to an appendix. Mention IDN in charset section. tracking information to an appendix. Mention IDN in charset section.
All previous thanks to suggestions by Larry Masinter. All previous thanks to suggestions by Larry Masinter.
A.3 Changes since -08 A.3. Changes since -08
Modifications derived from Last-Call comments: Made more clear that Modifications derived from Last-Call comments: Made more clear that
DNS URIs does not imply use of the DNS protocol, but the issue is not DNS URIs does not imply use of the DNS protocol, but the issue is not
stressed because of the apparent inflamatory state of affairs. Added stressed because of the apparent inflamatory state of affairs. Added
informative references to HTML and FTP. Clarified that dnsname can informative references to HTML and FTP. Clarified that dnsname can
be empty. Clarified that first dnsqueryelement "win" in case of be empty. Clarified that first dnsqueryelement "win" in case of
ambiguity. Clarified security consideration with respect to unknown ambiguity. Clarified security consideration with respect to unknown
dnsqueryelements. Use "authority" instead of "server". Say "IANA dnsqueryelements. Use "authority" instead of "server". Say "IANA
registered" instead of "standard". Interoperability note about registered" instead of "standard". Interoperability note about
binary DNS labels. Typos. binary DNS labels. Typos.
A.4 Changes since -09 A.4. Changes since -09
Use legal texts from RFC 3667. Update UTF-8 reference to RFC 3629. Use legal texts from RFC 3667. Update UTF-8 reference to RFC 3629.
Simplified introduction. Discuss relative and absolute dnsname's. Simplified introduction. Discuss relative and absolute dnsname's.
Clarify that empty dnsname correspond to the root. Change so that Clarify that empty dnsname correspond to the root. Change so that
dns:foo?TYPE=A;TYPE=TXT is invalid, instead of meaning TYPE=A. The dns:foo?TYPE=A;TYPE=TXT is invalid, instead of meaning TYPE=A. The
underspecified extension mechanism was dropped; now only TYPE= and underspecified extension mechanism was dropped; now only TYPE= and
CLASS= are permitted. Remove background discussion of why the CLASS= are permitted. Remove background discussion of why the
dnsname field is made a IDN unaware domain name slot. Use standard dnsname field is made a IDN unaware domain name slot. Use standard
DNS escaping (i.e, "\." for ".") instead of broken approach that DNS escaping (i.e, "\." for ".") instead of broken approach that
violated the URI specification. Improve examples. Add security violated the URI specification. Improve examples. Add security
considerations. considerations.
A.5 Changes since -10 A.5. Changes since -10
Add section "Usage Model". Move acknowledgements, as per rfc2223bis. Add section "Usage Model". Move acknowledgements, as per rfc2223bis.
Add permissive copying condition. Updates to align with RFC 3986. Add permissive copying condition. Updates to align with RFC 3986.
A.6 Changes since -11 A.6. Changes since -11
Fix typos. IESG feedback: Move RFC2119 reference to normative Fix typos. IESG feedback: Move RFC2119 reference to normative
section. Replace OCSP example with X.509 CRL Distribution Point section. Replace OCSP example with X.509 CRL Distribution Point
extension. Fix ABNF not to use "...". extension. Fix ABNF not to use "...".
A.7 Changes since -12 A.7. Changes since -12
Reference MIME and RFC 4027. IESG feedback: Do not mention OpenPGP/ Reference MIME and RFC 4027. IESG feedback: Do not mention OpenPGP/
X.509 as illustrative examples in the introduction section. X.509 as illustrative examples in the introduction section.
A.8. Changes since -13
Fix typos.
Author's Address
Simon Josefsson
Email: simon@josefsson.org
Intellectual Property Statement Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
 End of changes. 

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.23, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/