Internet DRAFT - draft-licanhuang-dnsop-distributeddns

draft-licanhuang-dnsop-distributeddns



 

DNDOP                                                          L. Huang 
Internet-Draft                       Hangzhou Domain Zones Tech.Co.,Ltd. 
Intended status: Standards Track         
Expires: July 27, 2013                                  January 28,2013
 
 
                 Distributed DNS Implementation in IpV6 
              draft-licanhuang-dnsop-distributeddns-13.txt 
 
 
 
Status of this Memo 
 
   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the 
provisions of BCP 78 and 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 July 27, 2013 .                                
 
 
Copyright Notice 
 
   Copyright (c) 2013 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 (http://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. 
 
   
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013  FORMFEED[Page 1] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6          January 28,2013
 
 
 
Abstract 
 
 
 
 
This file is a proposal for P2P based Domain Name query strategy in 
IpV6.  The DNS servers construct n-tuple overlay virtual hierarchical 
overlay network.  With cached addresses of DNS servers, the overload of 
traffic in tree structure can be avoided and more security can be  
enhanced due to the random lookup paths. This strategy may use for 
Domain Name query and reverse Domain Name query in IpV6 for a large 
number of domain names. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013   FORMFEED[Page 2] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6         January 28,2013
 
 
Table of Contents 
 
   1. Introduction ................................................3 
   2. Virtual Hierarchical Overlay Network for DNS ................3 
      2.1 DNS Query Strategy ......................................5 
      2.2 Route Table Definitions..................................6 
      2.3 Reverse Resolution.......................................6 
      2.4 Message..................................................7 
   3. Some Notes ..................................................12 
      3.1 Complexity...............................................12 
      3.2 Random trace.............................................12 
   4. Security Considerations......................................13 
   5. IANA Considerations..........................................13 
   6. Acknowledgements.............................................13 
   7. Appendix A: protocols of establishment and lookup ...........14 
      7.1 Primitives and Functions ................................14 
      7.2 Protocol of Network Establishment........................14 
      7.3 lookup protocol..........................................15 
   8. References ..................................................17 
      8.1.  Normative References ..................................17 
      8.2.  Informative References ................................17 
   Author's Address ...............................................17 
 
1. Introduction 
 
   Because the Webs have large number of Domain name links, DNS 
   becomes a vital component in today's Internetinfrastructure. 
   However, the existing DNS architecture will encounter problems 
   in the future for the growth of the Internet.  
 
   This file is a proposal for P2P based DNS query stratagy in IpV6. The 
   DNS servers construct n-tuple overlay virtual hierarchical overlay 
   network. With cached addresses of DNS servers, the overload of 
   traffic in tree structure can be avoided and more securtity can be  
   enhanced due to the random lookup paths. This strategy may be used 
   in DNS query in IpV6 for a large number of domain names. 
 
   There are huge numbers of IP address in IpV6. Moreover, there may be 
   a use case for multi domain names associated with a sigle IP address. 
   Pervasive computing will enlarge the numbers of DNS lookups.  DNS 
   implementation currently used may encounter overload traffic in root 
   DNS servers. This document uses VIRGO[VIRGO] overlay network to solve 
   the above problem. VIRGO is a multi-tuple virtual hierarchical 
   overlay network with cached node address. We here change some places 
   to suit the distributed DNS implementation. The lookup protocols of 
   DNS  is similar as the protocols in VIRGO[VIRGO], which is 
   illustrated in detail in the paper[P2PSD] titled as A P2P service 
   discovery strategy based on content catalogues. 
 
 
2. Virtual Hierarchical Overlay Network for DNS 
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013   FORMFEED[Page 3] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6       January 28,2013
 
 
   Virtual Hierarchical Overlay Network for DNS is a hybrid of 
   unstructured P2P and structured P2P technologies. The DNS servers 
   construct multi-tuple Virtual Hierarchical Overlay Network. Some 
   servers are only leaves of the network, others may coexist in 
   different layers. These servers form a duplicated virtual 
   hierarchical tree, with one root layer, several middle layers, and 
   many leaf virtual nodes. Random connections cached in a DNS server's 
   routing table are maintained. The servers in the same domain are 
   fully connected. Unlike query pathes currently used  in Domain Name 
   Systems allways go to root servers, Virtual Hierarchical Overlay 
   Network for DNS routes quest message to the server with theoretical 
   least hops from destination server. The route tables of Domain Name 
   servers contains two kinds of route addresses, tree addresses, which 
   are prerequiste, and cached addresses. 
 
   The following is some terms related to the Virtual Hierarchical 
   Overlay Network for DNS. 
 
   Domain Name Server is a node which keeps local domain RRs[RFC1035]. 
   All the Domain Name Servers are the same except some Domain Name 
   Servers taking the function of gateways in the meantime. Every Domain 
   Name Server just controls the leaves of the domain. Every Domain Name 
   Server contains route table. Every Domain Name Server uses its 
   controlled domain name by cutting off leaves as its Identification, 
   which is called as Domain Name Server Identification (DNSI). For 
   example, for Grid.network.computer.science, 
   Wireless.network.computer.science, etc., Domain Name Servers have 
   Identifications -- network.computer.science. It keeps RRs for 
   Grid.network.computer.science,Wireless.network.computer.science,etc. 
   The Domain Name Server can be replicated by machines with different 
   IP addresses, but all with same RRs and route tables. 
 
   Gateway is a nodee which takes part in routing functions in 
   several different layers of virtual groups. 
 
   Gateway uppermost layer  is the uppermost virtual group layer that 
   the gateway is in. The layers can be calculated by the domain 
   lengths of node ID.  
 
   Virtual group is formed virtually by the gateways nodes. The Group 
   Name is part of the node's domain name, eg. in the above example, 
   science, science.computer, science.computer.network are group names. 
 
   N-tuple virtual group tree (denoted by NVGT) is a hierarchical tree 
   formed by virtual groups. Among the nodes of the lower layer virtual 
   groups, N-tuple gateway nodes in each group are chosen to form upper- 
   layer groups, and from the nodes of these upper-layer groups to form 
   upper-upper-layer groups in the same way, and this way is repeated 
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013    FORMFEED[Page 4] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6        January 28,2013
 
 
   until a root-layer group is formed. 
 
   In the Virtual Hierarchical Overlay Network for DNS, all Domain Name 
   Servers consist of N-tuple virtual group tree. The Virtual 
   Hierarchical Overlay Network can be established by manual or 
   automatedly by establishment protocol which is shown in Appendix A. 
 
   Domain Name Servers are virtually architectured as Tree Structure. 
   Some Domain Name Servers takes roles of gateways.  When a  Domain 
   Name Server joins the network, it first finds one of Domain Name 
   Servers which share the maxmium prefixs with the joining Domain Name 
   Server, then the joining server sends the JOINMESSAGE to the 
   latter, the latter will broadcast the message to all Domain Name 
   Servers in the virtual group. The Network establishment is shown at 
   Appendix 4.2. 
 
 
 
   2.1 DNS Query Strategy 
 
   Every DNS server is the same but some coexist in more than one layer. 
   Every DNS Server  maintains a route table and a RR record related to 
   its Domain. Route table includes addresses of Foreign Name Servers 
   which are prerequiste for Virtual Hierarchical Overlay Network and 
   cached addresses  of Foreign Name Servers which are refreshed by TTL 
   rule. The query process is shown as the following figure. 
 
                                              |  Foreign 
                                              | 
    Local Host                                | 
                                              | 
    +-------+              +--------+         |  +-------+   +-------+ 
    |       | user queries |        |queries  |  |       |   |       | 
    |User   |------------->| Local  |---------|->|Foreign|-->| Tree +| 
    |Program|              | Name   |         |  |Name   |   | Cache | 
    |       |<-------------| Server |<--------|--|Server |<--|(route | 
    |       |user responses|        |responses|  |       |   | table)| 
    +-------+              +--------+         |  +-------+   +-------+ 
                            |  A  A           |        | 
     Route cache operations |  |  |___________|____    | 
                            |  |              |    |   | 
                            V  |              |    |   V 
                      +----------------+      |  +--------+   +------+ 
                      |   Tree +       |      |  |Authori-|   |      | 
                      |   Cache        |      |  |tive    |-->|  RR  | 
                      | (route table)  |      |  |Name    |<--|      | 
                      +----------------+      |  |Server  |   |      | 
                                              |  +--------+   +------+ 
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013   FORMFEED[Page 5] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6     January 28,2013
 
 
   The query process is as the following: User program sends QUERY 
   MESSAGE to Local Name Server. If Local Name Server is the authoritive 
   Domain Name Server, then the Local Name Server will check its RR to 
   resolve the request Domain name. Otherwise, The Local Name Server 
   will routes to the Foreign Name Server which is closer to the 
   authoritive Domain Name Server by calculating theoretical hops. Then 
   the Foreign Name Server routes to the even closer Foreign Domain Name 
   Server. Repeat this process, until the authoritive Domain Name Server 
   has been found. Finally, the authoritive Domain Name Server resolves 
   request Domain Name by check its RR record, and responses to the 
   Local Name Server. The latter will forward the response to the User 
   Program. The details of the algorithm can be found in Appendix A. 
 
   2.2 Route Table Definitions 
 
   All Route Tables have the same top level format shown below, which is 
   also called as Domain Server Node Entity(DSNE): 
 

 
   +------------+------------------------------------------------------+ 
   |Section Name|   Description                                        | 
   +------------+------------------------------------------------------+ 
   |DNSI        |Domain Name Server Indetification of an  Domain Server| 
   +------------+------------------------------------------------------+ 
   |TYPE        |route TYPE codes  (TREE as 0, CHACHE as 1)            | 
   +------------+------------------------------------------------------+ 
   |TTL         |the time interval that the route record may be cached | 
   |            |before the source of the information should again be  | 
   |            |consulted.                                            | 
   +------------+------------------------------------------------------+ 
   |UTS         |Unreachable time stamp.If the route was cached, then  | 
   |            |reflesh it by TTL rule.If the route is gateway node in| 
   |            |virtual tree structure,notice to manager to repair it.| 
   +------------+------------------------------------------------------+ 
   |IPADDRESSes | IP addresses of the replicated Domain Servers        | 
   +------------+------------------------------------------------------+ 
 
 

   2.3 Reverse Resolution 
 
   Reverse Resolution uses .IN-ADDR.ARPA domain today. In IPv6, 
   .IP6.ARPA was defined by [RFC3152], and more detail information can 
   be found in [RFC3596]. Because IPv6 has a huge Name Space, it is 
   difficult to keep reverse RRs in today's architecture.  Here, an 
   approach with Virtual Hierarchical Overlay Network for DNS can solve 
   the above problem.  Domain Name Servers managing local networks is 
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013  FORMFEED[Page 6] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6       January 28,2013
 
 
   called as the hierarchical address Domain just like Domain Name 
   Resolution.  These Domain Name Servers join the Virtual Hierarchical 
   Overlay Network for DNS. The records of route table is the same as 
   the  Domain Name Resolution.  DNSI(Domain Name Server Indetification 
   of an  Domain Server) is like as: 
   fea5.47ff.203.8002.0.200.2001.IP6.INT  with Server IP Address 
   2001:200:0:8002:203:47ff:fea5:0010 resolutes the Domain Name from 
   2001:200:0:8002:203:47ff:fea5:0 to 
   2001:200:0:8002:203:47ff:fea5:ffff.  Whereas in Domain Name 
   resolution,  popular.music  with Server IP Address 
   2001:200:0:8002:203:47ff:fea5:0010 solutes www.***.popular.music 
   Domain Names. The servers for popular.music  and 
   fea5.47ff.203.8002.0.200.2001.IP6.ARPA can be same or different. 
   Reverse Domain Name Servers joins Virtual Hierarchical Overlay 
   Network for DNS is the same as  Domain Name Servers , and also use 
   protocol shown at Appendix 4.2. The query protocol is also the same 
   as Domain Name Resolution, which is shown as Appendix 4.3. The Total 
   address space of IPv6 is huge. But, only the Reserve Domain Name 
   Servers managing used IP addresses will join the Virtual Hierarchical 
   Overlay Network for DNS. And the worst maxium query steps are 32. 
   With route cache the query steps will be less than 32. Therefore, 
   this strategy for Reverse Resolution is feasible. 
 
 
   2.4 Message 
 
   2.4.1 DNS Message format 
 
   +---------------+-----------+---------------------------------------+ 
   |Section Name   |Size(bytes)|         Description                   | 
   +---------------+-----------+---------------------------------------+ 
   |Header         |  12       |indicating the type of message and the | 
   |               |           |number of entries in the other sections| 
   |               |           |of the message                         | 
   +---------------+-----------+---------------------------------------+ 
   |Question       |variable   |querying or joining information        | 
   +---------------+-----------+---------------------------------------+ 
   |Answer         |variable   |resource records matchmaking questions | 
   |               |           |or confirmation answer                 | 
   +---------------+-----------+---------------------------------------+ 
   |Additional     |variable   |Conveys one or more resource records   | 
   |               |           |relative to the query                  | 
   +---------------+-----------+---------------------------------------+ 
   |Join           |variable   |Server's joining information           | 
   +---------------+-----------+---------------------------------------+ 
   |Confirmation   |variable   |Confirmation for server's join         | 
   +---------------+-----------+---------------------------------------+ 
 
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires January 25,2013      FORMFEED[Page 7] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6       January 28,2013
 
 
   2.4.2 Domain Name Node Entity format 
 

                                       1  1  1  1  1  1 
         0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  0  1  2  3  4  5 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                      DSNELen                  | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                      DNSILen                  | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                                               | 
       /                      DNSI                     / 
       /                                               / 
       |                                               | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                      TYPE                     | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                      TTL                      | 
       |                                               | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                      UTS                      | 
       |                                               | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                      NumRDS                   | 
       |                                               | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                                               | 
       /                  IPADDRESS1                   / 
       /                     ...                       / 
       /                  IPAddressn                   / 
       |                                               | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
 

       Here, DSNELen is the length of Domain Name Node Entity, and 
   DNSILen is the length of Domain Name Server Identification.  NumRDS 
   is the number of replicated Domain Name Server IP Addresses. 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013  FORMFEED[Page 8] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6     January 28,2013
 
 
   2.4.3 DNS Message Header Format 
 
 
                                       1  1  1  1  1  1 
         0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  0  1  2  3  4  5 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                      ID                       | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |QR|   Opcode  |AA|TC|RD|RA|CA|NF|Z |   RCODE   | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                    QDCOUNT                    | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                    ANCOUNT                    | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                    NSCOUNT                    | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                    ARCOUNT                    | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
 
   where: 
 
   The items are the same meaning with [RFC1035] except for the 
   following: 
 
   QR             A one bit field that specifies whether this message is 
                  a query/join(0), or a response/confirmation(1). 
   OPCODE         A four bit field that specifies kind of query in this 
                  message.  This value is set by the originator of a 
                  query and copied into the response.  The values are: 
                  0               a standard query (QUERY) 
                  1               an inverse query (IQUERY) 
                  2               a  server status request (STATUS) 
                  3               Server join 
                  4-15            reserved for future use 
 
   CA             Confirmation answer for authoritative server join. 
 
   NF             0 for RFC 1035, 1 for this specification 
 
   Z              Reserved for future use.  Must be zero in all 
                  queries and responses. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013      FORMFEED[Page 9] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6      January 28,2013
 
 
   2.4.4 Question section format 
 
   The question section is used to carry the "question" in most queries, 
   i.e., the parameters that define what is being asked.  The section 
   contains QDCOUNT (usually 1) entries, each of the following format: 
 
                                       1  1  1  1  1  1 
         0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  0  1  2  3  4  5 
 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                                               | 
       /                     LocalNSIP                 / 
       /                                               / 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                                               | 
       /                     QNAME                     / 
       /                                               / 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                     QTYPE                     | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                     QCLASS                    | 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
 
   where: 
 
        The items are the same meaning with [RFC1035] except for the 
   following: 
 
    LocalNSIP   Local Name Server IP address used for sending back the 
                anwser from any zone server. 
 
 
 
   2.4.5 Answer  section format 
 
                                       1  1  1  1  1  1 
         0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  0  1  2  3  4  5 
 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                                               | 
       /                     RRs                       / 
       /                                               / 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                                               | 
       /                     AuthoritiveDSNE           / 
       /                                               / 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
 
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 28,2011    FORMFEED[Page 10] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6        January 28,2013
 
 
   where: 
        The items are the same meaning with [RFC1035] except for the 
   following: 
 
    AuthoritiveDSNE  Node entity of the Authoritive Name Server used for 
   cached 
                     routetable 
 
 
 
 
   2.4.6 Join  section format 
 
                                       1  1  1  1  1  1 
         0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  0  1  2  3  4  5 
 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                                               | 
       /                     JoinDSNE                  / 
       /                                               / 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
 
 
   where: 
 
       JoinDSNE      Joining Domain Server Node Entity 
 
 
 
   2.4.7 Confirmation   section format 
 
                                       1  1  1  1  1  1 
         0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  0  1  2  3  4  5 
 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
       |                                               | 
       /                     ConfirmationDSNE          / 
       /                                               / 
       +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 
 
 
   where: 
 
        ConfirmationDSNE    Node Entity of Domain Server 
                            confirming joining Domain Serve 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013    FORMFEED[Page 11] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft           DNS Impl in IPv6         January 28,2013
 
 
3. Some Notes 
 
       This specification is compliant with [RFC1035]. 
 
       High performance and stable computers are chosen as gateway 
   nodes.  Because the gateway node not only manages local RRs,but also 
   routes messages.  The virtual tree structure requires gateway node 
   stable. 
 
       Due to the prerequiste tree, every Domain Name Server can reach 
   other ones.  Due to redundant gateway nodes, the virtual tree can be 
   allways maintaned. 
 
       Due to the random cached nodes in the route table of every Domain 
   Name Server, the route paths are randomly chosen. This may avoid the 
   network trafic in tree-like structure. This may also enhance the 
   security of the DNS. 
 
   3.1 Complexity 
 
      The time complexity, space complexity and message-cost of the 
   proposed architecture is O(L), where L is the lengths of Domain Name. 
 
      Because the DNS server nodes are virtually organized as a tuple 
   virtual tree, every DNS server has a route table  which includes 
   prerequisite DNS servers' IP addresses for Tree Paths (TREE portion) 
   and cached DNS servers' IP addresses (CACHED portion). 
 
      Because the message is routed according to the minimum of 
   theoretical distance from destination node , and the route table 
   contains TREE portion,  every hop reduces the distance from 
   destination node by at least one hop, Therefore, 
 
      hops(a,b)   < length(a) + length(b)-1                         (1) 
 
      Where, hops(a,b) is for the hops from node a to node b; 
   length(a),length(b) are for 
      node a domain name lengths and node b domain name lengths 
   respectively. 
      For example, the length of www.nic.fr is 3. So, 
 
      time complexity = O(L)                                       (2) 
 
      message_cost = O(L)                                          (3), 
   where L is the length of domain name. 
 
      Because the route table of the virtual gateway nodes virtually 
    existed from root layer to bottom layer groups has the maximum 
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013  FORMFEED[Page 12] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6              January 28,2013
 
 
   route items of nodes's information, 
    we have: 
 
       MaxItems  = L*N_tuple*nvg +Max_Cached                         (4) 
 
     ,where L is the length of domain name., N_tuple is multiplicity of 
   gateway nodes for virtual tree, 
     nvg is number of virtual groups, Max_Cached is the  maximum number 
   of cached records in the route table 
 
     Therefore, 
 
      Space Complexity = O(L)                                        (5) 
 
 
   Also due to the cached information of DNS servers, the performance of 
   DNS lookups may reach 0(1) due to Zipf's law[VIRGODNS]. 
  
3.2  Random trace 
 
   Every node has a path to any other node. Supposing a-->b. Every route  
step has passible paths of the number of elements of route table of the  
node. Thus, the diffrent numbers  of paths  is about |routetable(a)| at  
DNS server a. In the same way, the diffrent numbers  of paths can be  
choosed is about |routetable(vi)| at DNS server vi. Therefore,  
the totoal number of paths is: 
 
 |routetable(a)| X ...X|routetable(vi)| X...X |routetable(vn)| . 
vi...vn are intermediate route nodes. 
 Therefore, the communication path would be random. 
 
   4.  Security Considerations 
 
   For security consideration, the DNS servers before joining P2P network MUST  
   be approved by the upper layer organizations. layer organizations should be  
   controlled by trustful communities.   
 
   5.  IANA Considerations 
 
   This document consists entirely of DNS IANA Considerations.   
 
   6.  Acknowledgements 
 
   Thanks for Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton's valuable opinions.    
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013    FORMFEED[Page 13] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6      January 28,2013 
 
 
 
 
   7.  Appendix A: protocols of establishment and lookup 
 
 
   7.1 Primitives and Functions 
 
        sender.send (message,receiver), sender sends message to receiver 
 
        sender.send(message,receiver (- Set), sender sends message to 
        all the receivers belong to a Set 
 
        RouteTableAdd(DSNE,type), add DSNE to route table 
 
        lookup_location(DomainName),find the destination node's location 
 
        LengthOfSamePrefix(DomainName,DomainName), length of shared 
        prefixes between two nodes 
 
        LengthOfDomainName(DomainName), the length of  DomainName 
 
        hopDistance2object(pi,DomainName), the theoretical hops from 
        the node to the destination node 
 
        selectRouteNodeFromRouteTable(DomainName), choose  next hop node 
        from route table 
 
        checkupRRs(QUERYMESSAGE), retrieve RR record  in  RR database 
 
 
   7.2 Protocol of Network Establishment 
 
  
   Here, a new Domain Name Server P_join joins the network. If Header of 
   DNS Message is set to join, the Message is callaed as JOINMESSAGE;if 
   Header of DNS Message is set to confirmation, the Message is callaed 
   as CONFIRMATIONMESSAGE. 
 
 
   1. P_join finds one of Domain Name Servers P_groupToJoin(which 
      belongs to virtual group--joinGroup) sharing maximium prefixs with 
      P_join. 
 
   2. P_join.send(JOINMESSAGE, P_groupToJoin); 
 
   3. P_groupToJoin.send(JOINMESSAGE, pi (- joinGroup); 
 
   4. (pi (- joinGroup).send(pi.CONFIRMATIONMESSAGE, P_join); 
            (pi (- joinGroup).RouteTableAdd(P_join.DSNE,TREE); 
 
   5. P_join.RouteTableAdd((pi (- joinGroup).DSNE,TREE); 
 
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013    FORMFEED[Page 14] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6       January 28,2013 
 
  
   6. set joinGroup to one upper group; 
 
   7. set P_groupToJoin = pi (- joinGroup; 
 
   8. repeat step 2 to 7 until replicated nodes no less 
      than n-tuple in joinGroup or joinGroup is root group. 
 
 
   7.3 lookup protocol 
 
   Here, if Header of DNS message is set to query, the DNS Message is 
   callaed as QUERYMESSAGE; if Header of DNS message is set to response, 
   the DNS Message is callaed as RESULTMESSAGE. 
 
        Step 1  UserProgram.send (QUERYMESSAGE, LocalNameServer) 
 
        Step 2  authoritiveDNServer = 
                LocalNameServer.lookup_location(QUERYMESSAGE.DomainName) 
 
        Step 3  RESULTMESSAGE= 
                authoritiveDNServer.checkupRRs(QUERYMESSAGE); 
 
        Step 4  authoritiveDNServer=send(RESULTMESSAGE, 
   LocalNameServer); 
 
        Step 5  LocalNameServer.send(RESULTMESSAGE, UserProgram); 
 
        Step 6 
   LocalNameServer.RouteTableAdd(authoritiveDNServer.DSNE,CHACHE); 
 
   Where, function of lookup_location (locates the destination node by 
   the minimum  hops) is as following: 
 
    Function  p.lookup_location(QUERYMESSAGE) \{ 
 
          if LengthOfSamePrefix(p.DNSI,QUERYMESSAGE.DomainName)== 
                 LengthOfDomainName(QUERYMESSAGE.DomainName)-1 
 
                 return p; 
          else \{ 
 
             routeP = 
               p.selectRouteNodeFromRouteTable(QUERYMESSAGE.DomainName); 
 
             p.send(QUERYMESSAGE,routeP); 
 
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013    FORMFEED[Page 15] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6       January 28,2013 
 
 
 
 
             if (message sending is  successful) 
                routeP.lookup_location(QUERYMESSAGE); 
 
             else \{ 
 
                Mark routeP as unreachable in p.routetable; 
 
                p.lookup_location(QUERYMESSAGE); \} 
            \} 
           \} 
 
   Where, function selectRouteNodeFromRouteTable(select route with 
   theoretical least hops from destination Domain Name Server) is as 
   following: 
 
 
     Function  p.selectRouteNodeFromRouteTable(requestDomainName) 
 
      gnSet = 
         Minimum(p.hopDistance2object(pi (- RouteTable,requestDomainName)); 
 
      return routeP = random(gnSet); 
 
      Where,  function hopDistance2object (calculating theoretical hops 
   from destination Domain Name Server) is as following: 
 
 
      Function p.hopDistance2object(pi,requestDomainName) 
 
        if LengthOfSamePrefix(pi.DNSI, requestDomainName) ==1 
 
           return LengthOfDomainName(requestDomainName)+pi.length -3; 
 
        elseif pi.length < LengthOfSamePrefix(pi.DNSI, requestDomainName) 
 
           return  LengthOfDomainName(requestDomainName) - 
                LengthOfSamePrefix(pi.DNSI, requestDomainName)-1; 
 
        else 
 
           return LengthOfDomainName(requestDomainName)+pi.length - 
                2*LengthOfSamePrefix(pi.DNSI,requestDomainName)-1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013    FORMFEED[Page 16] 
 
 
 
 
 
Internet Draft              DNS Impl in IPv6          January 28,2013 
  
 
8.  References 
 
8.1.  Normative References 
 
   [RFC1035]  Mockapetris, P., "DOMAIN NAMES - IMPLEMENTATION AND 
              SPECIFICATION",Specification," RFC1035, 
              USC/Information Sciences Institute,November, 1987. 
   [RFC3152]  Bush, R., "Delegation of IP6.ARPA," RFC 3152, BCP 49, 
              August 2001. 
   [RFC3596]  Thompson, S., C. Huitema, V. Ksinant, M. Souissi, "DNS 
              Extensions to Support IP Version 6," RFC 3596, October 2003. 
 
 
 
8.2.  Informative References 
 
 
   [VIRGO]     Huang, L., "VIRGO: Virtual Hierarchical Overlay 
               Network for Scalable Grid Computing ",Proc. 
               European Grid Conference(EGC2005), in LNCS 3470, 
               p911-921, 2005. 
   [P2PSD]     Huang, L., "A P2P service discovery strategy based on 
               content catalogues", Data Science Journal, Vol(6), 2007, 
               ppS492-S499. 
               http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/dsj/6/0/S492/_pdf 
   [VIRGODNS]  Huang, L.,"VIRGO P2P based distributed DNS framework 
               for IPv6 network",Proc. 4th International 
               Conference on Networked Computing and Advanced Information 
               Management(NCM 2008) 
   [AGENT]     Huang, L.,"Constructing Large Scale Cooperative Multi-Agent
               Systems from Semantic P2P Networks", Springer,
               ISBN:978-3-642-34952-2, Vol(460),2013,  pp257-277 
 
 
 
Authors' Addresses 
 
 
   Lican Huang 
   Current Address: 
   Hangzhou Domain Zones Technology Co., Ltd.
   & 
   Hangzhou Domain Search Network Technology Co., Ltd.
   & 
   Zhejiang Sci_Tech University, 
   Hangzhou, P.R.China 
   EMail: lican.huang.hz@gmail.com; licanhuang@zstu.edu.cn; 
          huang_lican@yahoo.co.uk 
  
 
  
 
 
Huang, Lican             Expires July 27,2013  FORMFEED[Page 17]