Internet DRAFT - draft-arends-nscp

draft-arends-nscp






Network Working Group                                          R. Arends
Internet-Draft                                                 S. Morris
Intended status: Informational                              J. Dickinson
Expires: May 22, 2008                                            Nominet
                                                       November 19, 2007


                      Name Server Control Protocol
                          draft-arends-nscp-00

Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   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
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on May 22, 2008.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

Abstract

   This document describes the Name Server Control Protocol (NSCP).  The
   NSCP will permit the management of diverse name server
   implementations.  The NSCP uses NETCONF as framework.







Arends, et al.            Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 1]

Internet-Draft                    NSCP                     November 2007


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
     1.1.  Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
     1.2.  Reserved Words  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   2.  High level requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   3.  Approaches to Nameserver Control  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   4.  Data Model  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     4.1.  A generic model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     4.2.  A Structured DNS model  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   6.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements  . . . . . . . . . . 7





































Arends, et al.            Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 2]

Internet-Draft                    NSCP                     November 2007


1.  Introduction

1.1.  Rationale

   Operators of name servers often deploy software from multiple
   different vendors in order to reduce the threat from vulnerabilities
   found in any single implementation.  However, doing so requires
   understanding a different control interface for each implementation.
   Additionally, provisioning for name server clusters does not scale
   well, since it often requires active lower level management of
   individual hosts.

   This document defines a DNS name server control protocol which will
   permit management of multiple different name server implementations
   via a common interface.

   The NSCP will use NETCONF [1]as framework.

1.2.  Reserved Words

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.


2.  High level requirements

   The Protocol should:

   o  Enable the operation of all nameserver implementations
   o  Allow the (un)setting of all nameserver configuration parameters
   o  Be able to signal which operations are supported by the
      implementation being controlled
   o  Allow the collection of any available nameserver statistics
   o  Be extensible to allow implementors to extend to cover new objects
      and methods.
   o  Be able to handle any dns data that might be seen on the wire,
      whether or not it is legal.

   The requirements for the protocol are independent of the actual
   functions that a nameserver implementation provides.  Any operation
   listed in this document does not require support for this function in
   an implementation.  It is RECOMMENDED however, that functions which
   are supported by nameservers can be supported by this protocol,
   either as a core function, or as part of the extentions.

   The level of feedback, such as state, or statistics that an
   implementation returns differs per implementation.  This document



Arends, et al.            Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 3]

Internet-Draft                    NSCP                     November 2007


   does not dictate form or grammar of this feedback, but does allow the
   transfer of this data.  The extensibility of the protocol should be
   rich enough to allow for various forms and ways of aggregating this
   feedback.


3.  Approaches to Nameserver Control

   There have been several different approaches suggested for
   controlling nameservers.  Possibilities include, but are not limited
   to, NETCONF, SNMP, some kind of in-band DNS based solution or a
   totally new protocol.  Whilst any of these solutions can work we
   favor a solution based on NETCONF for the following reasons.

   o  It is based on XML.
   o  It operates persistent connections.
   o  It operates a command/response model.
   o  The protocol describes how error information is returned from the
      agent to the client.
   o  It is extensible.
   o  It allows a client to discover the set of protocol extensions
      supported by a server.
   o  It provides a separation of configuration and state data.
   o  It is designed to run on multiple different transports such as ssh
      which have built-in strong authentication and encryption.
   o  It provides sophisticated searching capabilities.


4.  Data Model

   Netconf treats the contents of its configuration elements as opaque
   data and assumes that the application will know what to do with it.
   For this reason it is necessary to define a data model to contain DNS
   configuration data.  This data model will be required for use in NSCP
   and may be of use to developers of future nameserver implementations.

   There are several options for doing this, two of which are presented
   here:

4.1.  A generic model

   A typical nameserver configuration file is made up of sections and
   configuration items.  A possible representation is shown in the
   following fragment of XML:







Arends, et al.            Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 4]

Internet-Draft                    NSCP                     November 2007


      <file name="ns.conf">
         <section name="server">
            <configitem name="ip-address">10.0.0.1</configitem>
            <configitem name="version">not available</configitem>
         </section>
         <section name="zone">
            <configitem name="name">example.com</configitem>
            <configitem name="zonfile">example.com.zone</configitem>
         </section>
      </file>

4.2.  A Structured DNS model

   Analysis of a range of nameserver configurations leads to a model
   that is specific to DNS, such as:

                  Server
                    |
       +------------+------------+
       |                         |
   PeerGroup                 Panorama
       |1                        |1
       |                         |
       |*             1        * |*
      Peer        ACL -------- View -------- Zone
                   |1               1      *   |1
                   |                           |
                   |*                          |*
                  ACE                        RRSet
                                               |1
                                               |
                                               |1..*
                                               RR
                                               ^ --[ Inheritance symbol
                                               |
                                               |
                                           Specific RR

   In the above diagram, the names of the elements correspond to
   standard DNS concepts, with the following additions:

   o  Peer - either a master or slave of the server in question.
   o  PeerGroup - the collection of Peers.
   o  Panorama - a collection of views.


5.  Security Considerations




Arends, et al.            Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 5]

Internet-Draft                    NSCP                     November 2007


6.  Informative References

   [1]  Enns, R., "NETCONF Configuration Protocol", RFC 4741,
        December 2006.


Authors' Addresses

   Roy Arends
   Nominet
   Minerva House
   Edmund Halley Road
   Oxford Science Park
   Oxford  OX4 4DQ
   UNITED KINGDOM

   Phone: +44 1865 332211
   Email: roy@nominet.org.uk


   Stephen Morris
   Nominet
   Minerva House
   Edmund Halley Road
   Oxford Science Park
   Oxford  OX4 4DQ
   UNITED KINGDOM

   Phone: +44 1865 332211
   Email: stephen.morris@nominet.org.uk


   John Dickinson
   Nominet
   6 Nelson Close
   OX10 0LG
   UNITED KINGDOM

   Phone: +44 7789485308
   Email: jad@dickinson.co.uk











Arends, et al.            Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 6]

Internet-Draft                    NSCP                     November 2007


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
   contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
   retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
   THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
   OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
   THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.


Intellectual Property

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   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
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.


Acknowledgment

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
   Administrative Support Activity (IASA).





Arends, et al.            Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 7]