Special-Use Domain Names of the GNU Name System
draft-grothoff-iesg-special-use-p2p-gns-00

Abstract

This document registers a set of Special-Use Domain Names for use with Peer-to-Peer (P2P) systems, as per RFC6761.

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 http://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 January 1, 2016.

Copyright Notice

Copyright (c) 2015 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.

Table of Contents

• 1. Introduction
• 2. Applicability
• 3. Terminology and Conventions Used in This Document
• 4. Description of Special-Use Domains in P2P Networks
• 4.1. The "GNU" Relative pTLD
• 4.2. The "ZKEY" Compressed Public Key pTLD
• 5. Security Considerations
• 6. IANA Considerations
• 7. Acknowledgements
• 8. References
• 8.1. Normative References
• 8.2. Informative References
• Authors' Addresses

1. Introduction

The GNU Name System (GNS) uses "GNU" and "ZKEY" to realize privacy-enhanced, fully-decentralized and censorship-resistant naming.

In order to avoid interoperability issues with DNS as well as to address security and privacy concerns, this document registers a set of Special-Use Domain Names for use with P2P systems (pTLDs), as per [RFC6761],: "GNU" and "ZKEY".

2. Applicability

[RFC6761] Section 3 states:

• "[I]f a domain name has special properties that affect the way hardware and software implementations handle the name, that apply universally regardless of what network the implementation may be connected to, then that domain name may be a candidate for having the IETF declare it to be a Special-Use Domain Name and specify what special treatment implementations should give to that name. On the other hand, if declaring a given name to be special would result in no change to any implementations, then that suggests that the name may not be special in any material way, and it may be more appropriate to use the existing DNS mechanisms [RFC1034] to provide the desired delegation, data, or lack-of-data, for the name in question. Where the desired behaviour can be achieved via the existing domain name registration processes, that process should be used. Reservation of a Special-Use Domain Name is not a mechanism for circumventing normal domain name registration processes."

The set of Special-Use Domain Names for the GNU Name System (pTLDs) reserved by this document meet this requirement, as they share the following specificities:

• pTLDs are not manageable by some designated administration. Instead, they are managed according to various alternate strategies or combinations thereof, introduced in this document, and their respective protocol specifications: automated cryptographic assignment (".zkey"), or user-controled assignment in a private scope (".gnu").
• The pTLDs do not depend on the DNS context for their resolution: GNS resolution MAY involve the DNS server infrastructure, as it returns DNS-compatible results; however, a specific P2P protocol is used for regular name resolution, covered by its respective protocol specification.
• GNS name resolution is typically integrated with existing software libraries and APIs to extend regular DNS operation and enable more secure name resolution. GNS implementations MUST intercept queries for the respective pTLDs to ensure GNS names cannot leak into the DNS from properly configured systems. Nevertheless, in case GNS names do leak into the DNS, the default hierarchical DNS response to any request to any pTLD MUST be NXDOMAIN.
• Finally, in order to facilitate the GNU Name System's vision of a censorship-resistant, fully-decentralized name system, and provide security and privacy features matching user expectations, this document specifies desirable changes in existing DNS software and DNS operations.

3. Terminology and Conventions Used in This Document

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 [RFC2119].

The word "peer" is used in the meaning of a individual system on the network.

The abbreviation "pTLD" is used in this document to mean a pseudo Top-Level Domain, i.e., a Special-Use Domain Name per [RFC6761] reserved to the GNU Name System in this document. A pTLD is mentioned in capitals, and within double quotes to mark the difference with a regular DNS gTLD.

In this document, ".tld" (lowercase, with quotes) means: any domain or hostname within the scope of a given pTLD, while .tld (lowercase, without quotes) refers to an adjective form. For example, a collection of ".gnu" peers in "GNU", but an .gnu URL. [TO REMOVE: in the IANA Considerations section, we use the simple .tld format to request TLD reservation for consistency with previous RFCs].

The word "NXDOMAIN" refers to an alternate expression for the "Name Error" RCODE as described in section 4.1.1 of [RFC1035]. When referring to "NXDOMAIN" and negative caching [RFC2308] response, this document means an authoritative (AA=1) name error (RCODE=3) response exclusively.

4. Description of Special-Use Domains in P2P Networks

4.1. The "GNU" Relative pTLD

"GNU" is used to specify that a domain name should be resolved using GNS. The GNS resolution process is documented in [Wachs2014].

The "GNU" domain is special in the following ways:

1. Users can use these names as they would other domain names, entering them anywhere that they would otherwise enter a conventional DNS domain name.
   
   Since there is no central authority responsible for assigning .gnu names, and that specific domain is local to the local peer, users need to be aware of that specificity.
   
   Legacy applications MAY expect the DNS-to-GNS proxy to return DNS compatible results for the resolution of .gnu domains.
   
   
2. Legacy application software does not need to recognize .gnu domains as special, and may continue to use these names as they would other domain names.
   
   GNS-aware applications MAY also use GNS resolvers directly to resolve .gnu domains (in particular, if they want access to GNS-specific record types).
   
   
3. Name resolution APIs and libraries SHOULD either respond to requests for .gnu names by resolving them via the GNS protocol, or respond with NXDOMAIN.
   
   
4. Caching DNS servers SHOULD recognize .gnu names as special and SHOULD NOT attempt to look up NS records for them, or otherwise query authoritative DNS servers in an attempt to resolve .gnu names. Instead, caching DNS servers SHOULD generate immediate negative responses for all such queries.
   
   
5. Authoritative DNS servers are not expected to treat .gnu domain requests specially. In practice, they MUST answer with NXDOMAIN, as "GNU" is not available via global DNS resolution, and not doing so can put users' privacy at risk (see item 6).
   
   
6. DNS server operators SHOULD be aware that .gnu names are reserved for use with GNS, and MUST NOT override their resolution (e.g., to redirect users to another service or error information).
   
   
7. DNS registries/registrars MUST NOT grant any request to register .gnu names. This helps avoid conflicts [SAC45]. These names are defined by the GNS protocol specification, and they fall outside the set of names available for allocation by registries/registrars.
   
   

4.2. The "ZKEY" Compressed Public Key pTLD

The "ZKEY" pTLD is used to signify that resolution of the given name MUST be performed using a record signed by an authority that is in possession of a particular public key. Names in "ZKEY" MUST end with a domain which is the compressed point representation from [EdDSA] on [Curve25519] of the public key of the authority, encoded using Crockford's variant of base32hex [RFC4648] (with additionally 'U' being considered equal to 'V') for easier optical character recognition. A GNS resolver uses the key to locate a record signed by the respective authority.

"ZKEY" provides a (reverse) mapping from globally unique hashes to public key, therefore .zkey names are non-memorable, and are expected to be hidden from the user [Wachs2014].

The "ZKEY" domain is special in the following ways:

1. Users can use these names as they would other domain names, entering them anywhere that they would otherwise enter a conventional DNS domain name.
   
   Since there is no central authority necessary or possible for assigning .zkey names, and those names match cryptographic keys, users need to be aware that they do not belong to regular DNS, but are still global in their scope.
   
   Legacy applications MAY expect the DNS-to-GNS proxy to return DNS-compatible results for the resolution of .zkey domains.
   
   
2. Application software does not need to recognize .zkey domains as special, and may continue to use these names as they would other domain names.
   
   GNS-aware applications MAY also use GNS resolvers directly to resolve .zkey domains
   
   
3. Name resolution APIs and libraries SHOULD either respond to requests for .zkey names by resolving them via the GNS protocol, or respond with NXDOMAIN.
   
   
4. Caching DNS servers SHOULD recognize .zkey names as special and SHOULD NOT attempt to look up NS records for them, or otherwise query authoritative DNS servers in an attempt to resolve .zkey names. Instead, caching DNS servers SHOULD generate immediate negative responses for all such queries.
   
   
5. Authoritative DNS Servers are not expected to treat .zkey domain requests specially. In practice, they MUST answer with NXDOMAIN, as "ZKEY" is not available via global DNS resolution, and not doing so MAY put users' privacy at risk (see item 6).
   
   
6. DNS server operators SHOULD be aware that .zkey names are reserved for use with GNS, and MUST NOT override their resolution (e.g., to redirect users to another service or error information).
   
   
7. DNS registries/registrars MUST NOT grant any request to register .zkey names. This helps avoid conflicts [SAC45]. These names are defined as described above, and they fall outside the set of names available for allocation by registries/registrars.
   
   

5. Security Considerations

Specific software performs the resolution of names in the GNU Name System; this resolution process happens outside of the scope of DNS. Leakage of requests to such domains to the global operational DNS can cause interception of traffic that might be misused to monitor, censor, or abuse the user's trust, and lead to privacy issues with potentially tragic consequences for the user.

This document reserves these Top-Level Domain names to minimize the possibility of confusion, conflict, and especially privacy risks for users.

In the introduction of this document, there's a requirement that DNS operators do not override resolution of the GNS names. This is a regulatory measure and cannot prevent such malicious abuse in practice. Its purpose is to limit any information leak that would result from incorrectly configured systems, and to avoid that resolvers make unnecessary contact to the DNS Root Zone for such domains. Verisign, Inc., as well as several Internet service providers (ISPs) have notoriously abused their position to override NXDOMAIN responses to their customers in the past [SSAC-NXDOMAIN-Abuse]. For example, if a DNS operator would decide to override NXDOMAIN and send advertising to leaked .zkey sites, the information leak to the DNS would extend to the advertising server, with unpredictable consequences. Thus, implementors should be aware that any positive response coming from DNS must be considered with extra care, as it suggests a leak to DNS has been made, contrary to user's privacy expectations.

The reality of X.509 Certificate Authorities (CAs) creating misleading certificates for these pTLDs due to ignorance stresses the need to document their special use. X.509 Certificate Authorities MAY create certificates for "ZKEY" given CSRs signed with the respective private keys corresponding to the respective names. Certificate Authorities MUST NOT create certificates for "GNU" Top-Level domains. Nevertheless, clients SHOULD accept certificates for "GNU" Top-Level domains as they may be created legitimately by local proxies on the fly.

Finally, legacy applications that do not explicitly support the pTLDs significantly increase the risk of pTLD queries escaping to DNS, as they are entirely dependent on the correct configuration on the operating system.

6. IANA Considerations

The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) reserved the following entries in the Special-Use Domain Names registry [RFC6761]:

• .gnu
• .zkey

[TO REMOVE: the assignement URL is https://www.iana.org/assignments/special-use-domain-names/ ]

7. Acknowledgements

The authors thank the I2P and Namecoin developers for their constructive feedback, as well as Mark Nottingham for his proof-reading and valuable feedback. The authors also thank the members of DNSOP WG for their critiques and suggestions.

8. References

8.1. Normative References

8.2. Informative References

Authors' Addresses