[DNSOP] bname draft and its related bar bof

"Jiankang Yao" <yaojk@cnnic.cn> Fri, 17 June 2016 08:37 UTC

Return-Path: <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFBE312B031 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:37:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.327
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.327 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hkkx3txlGo3Q for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:37:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cnnic.cn (smtp13.cnnic.cn [218.241.118.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0D1912D098 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from healthyao-PC (unknown [218.241.103.47]) by ocmail02.zx.nicx.cn (Coremail) with SMTP id AQAAf0B5gDirtmNXYAfeCQ--.11544S2; Fri, 17 Jun 2016 16:36:59 +0800 (CST)
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 16:36:50 +0800
From: Jiankang Yao <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
X-Priority: 3
X-Has-Attach: no
X-Mailer: Foxmail 7.0.1.92[cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <20160617163626042794241@cnnic.cn>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_001_NextPart787155333575_=----"
X-CM-TRANSID: AQAAf0B5gDirtmNXYAfeCQ--.11544S2
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvJXoW7ZF4UAFW8Xr45ZFyDGw4xtFb_yoW8Krykpa 90grWfCFn7Jrn2kw1xXr18XFWrAr9xXrWktF1DJr12q3y5XFn7tF10kFW0934DXrWktrWq vFsxArsIv3yrW3DanT9S1TB71UUUUU7qnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDU0xBIdaVrnRJUUUvKb7Iv0xC_tr1lb4IE77IF4wAFF20E14v26r1j6r4UM7CY07I2 0VC2zVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6rWj6s0DM7CIcVAFz4kK6r1j6r18M28lY4IEw2IIxxk0rw A2F7IY1VAKz4vEj48ve4kI8wA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Xr0_Ar1l84ACjcxK6xII jxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Cr0_Gr1UM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVAFwI0_GcCE3s1l84ACjcxK6I 8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v26rxl6s0DM2AIxVAIcxkEcVAq07x20xvEncxIr21l5I8CrVCF0I0E 4I0vr24lYx0E2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Jr0_Jr4lYx0Ex4A2jsIE14v26r1j6r4UMcvjeVCFs4 IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwACjcxG0xvY0x0EwIxGrwACY4xI67k04243AVAKzVAKj4xxMxkIecxE wVAFwVW8ZwCF04k20xvY0x0EwIxGrwCFx2IqxVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwC20s026c02F4 0E14v26r106r1rMI8I3I0E7480Y4vE14v26r106r1rMI8E67AF67kF1VAFwI0_Jr0_Jryl IxkGc2Ij64vIr41lIxAIcVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUJVWUCwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvEc7CjxV AFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6rW3Jr0E3s1lIxAIcVC2z280aVAFwI0_ Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVC2z280aVCY1x0267AKxVWUJVW8JwCE64xvF2IEb7IF0Fy7YxBIdaVFxh VjvjDU0xZFpf9x07jo9a9UUUUU=
X-CM-SenderInfo: x1dryyw6fq0xffof0/
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/HSPKUJplN8qAW9Dd2GswrE_ZqeA>
Subject: [DNSOP] bname draft and its related bar bof
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: yaojk <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 08:37:10 -0000

Dear all,

     this draft was discussed in dnsext a few years ago. It has been updated to a new version.
    It redesigns the method of how to compatible with DNSSEC.

   If the resolver sends no signaling of bname support but with DNSSEC, the server does the following thing:
1). the server issues cname and its signature when querying the same owner name with BNAME
2). the server issues dname and its signature when querying the children of the same owner name of BNAME
PS: the server prepares the siganture of CNAME and DNAME beforehand. 

    If you have already with the key idea of this draft, you can focus on section 5 and 6.


  Could you kindly help to review it?

    any comments are welcome.


BTW,  We would like to hold a bar bof in the Berlin IETF meeting, discussing the issues related to bundled domain names' DNS resolution and its possible solution. 
if you are interested in it, pls kindly let me know it or subscribe it via https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bundled-domain-names  

 thanks  a lot.





Jiankang Yao

From: internet-drafts
Date: 2016-05-23 14:30
To: Xiaodong LEE; Paul A. Vixie; Jiankang Yao; Jiankang YAO; XiaoDong Lee; Paul Vixie
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-yao-dnsext-bname-06.txt

A new version of I-D, draft-yao-dnsext-bname-06.txt
has been successfully submitted by Jiankang YAO and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name: draft-yao-dnsext-bname
Revision: 06
Title: Bundled DNS Name Redirection
Document date: 2016-05-23
Group: Individual Submission
Pages: 15
URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-yao-dnsext-bname-06.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yao-dnsext-bname/
Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yao-dnsext-bname-06
Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-yao-dnsext-bname-06

Abstract:
   This document defines a new DNS Resource Record called "BNAME", which
   provides the capability to map itself and its subtree of the DNS name
   space to another domain.  It differs from the CNAME record which only
   maps a single node of the DNS name space, from the DNAME which only
   maps the subtree of the DNS name space to another domain.

                                                                                  


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat