Internet DRAFT - draft-dickinson-dnsop-deprecating-status-opcode
draft-dickinson-dnsop-deprecating-status-opcode
dnsop J. Dickinson
Internet-Draft Sinodun IT
Updates: 1035 (if approved) May 13, 2019
Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: November 14, 2019
Depreciating the DNS Status OpCode
draft-dickinson-dnsop-deprecating-status-opcode-00
Abstract
This document updates RFC1035 to depreciate the Status DNS OpCode.
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on November 14, 2019.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 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.
Dickinson Expires November 14, 2019 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Depreciating the DNS Status OpCode May 2019
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4. Depreciating the Status OpCode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1. Introduction
The Status OpCode was given the value of 2 in [RFC1035]. However, no
RFC defines what it means or how it should be used. This document
makes the Status OpCode obsolete.
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.
3. Implementation Status
To the author's knowledge there is no implementation of the Status
OpCode. A quick test shows inconsistent responses to a Status
request with different DNS server implementations returning NotImp,
Refused or giving no response at all.
4. Depreciating the Status OpCode
The Status OpCode MUST be marked OBSOLETE.
The correct response to the Status OpCode MUST be NotImp.
5. Security Considerations
None
Dickinson Expires November 14, 2019 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Depreciating the DNS Status OpCode May 2019
6. IANA Considerations
This documents updates the IANA registry "Domain Name System (DNS)
Parameters OpCode registry" [DNS-IANA].
+--------+-------------------+---------------+
| OpCode | Name | Reference |
+--------+-------------------+---------------+
| 2 | Status (OBSOLETE) | This Document |
+--------+-------------------+---------------+
7. Acknowledgments
Thanks to Mark Andrews, Matt Pounsett, Roy Arends and all the people
at IETF 104 that I asked if they knew of any usage of this OpCode.
Also thanks to Shane Kerr for reminding me to write this document.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, DOI 10.17487/RFC1035,
November 1987, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1035>.
[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>.
[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>.
8.2. Informative References
[DNS-IANA]
IANA, "Domain Name System (DNS) Parameters OpCode
registry", <https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-
parameters/dns-parameters.xhtml#dns-parameters-5>.
Author's Address
Dickinson Expires November 14, 2019 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Depreciating the DNS Status OpCode May 2019
John Dickinson
Sinodun IT
Magdalen Centre
Oxford Science Park
Oxford OX4 4GA
Email: jad@sinodun.com
Dickinson Expires November 14, 2019 [Page 4]
