diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc2916.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc2916.txt | 563 |
1 files changed, 563 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc2916.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc2916.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..53bb897 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc2916.txt @@ -0,0 +1,563 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group P. Faltstrom +Request for Comments: 2916 Cisco Systems Inc. +Category: Standards Track September 2000 + + + E.164 number and DNS + +Status of this Memo + + This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the + Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for + improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet + Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state + and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000). All Rights Reserved. + +Abstract + + This document discusses the use of the Domain Name System (DNS) for + storage of E.164 numbers. More specifically, how DNS can be used for + identifying available services connected to one E.164 number. + Routing of the actual connection using the service selected using + these methods is not discussed. + +1. Introduction + + Through transformation of E.164 numbers into DNS names and the use of + existing DNS services like delegation through NS records, and use of + NAPTR [1] records in DNS [2] [3], one can look up what services are + available for a specific domain name in a decentralized way with + distributed management of the different levels in the lookup process. + +1.1 Terminology + + The key words "MUST", "REQUIRED", "SHOULD", "RECOMMENDED", and "MAY" + in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [4]. + +2. E.164 numbers and DNS + + The domain "e164.arpa" is being populated in order to provide the + infrastructure in DNS for storage of E.164 numbers. In order to + facilitate distributed operations, this domain is divided into + subdomains. Holders of E.164 numbers which want to be listed in DNS + + + + + +Faltstrom Standards Track [Page 1] + +RFC 2916 E.164 number and DNS September 2000 + + + should contact the appropriate zone administrator in order to be + listed, by examining the SOA resource record associated with the + zone, just like in normal DNS operations. + + Of course, as with other domains, policies for such listings will be + controlled on a subdomain basis and may differ in different parts of + the world. + + To find the DNS names for a specific E.164 number, the following + procedure is to be followed: + + 1. See that the E.164 number is written in its full form, including + the countrycode IDDD. Example: +46-8-9761234 + + 2. Remove all non-digit characters with the exception of the leading + '+'. Example: +4689761234 + + 3. Remove all characters with the exception of the digits. Example: + 4689761234 + + 4. Put dots (".") between each digit. Example: 4.6.8.9.7.6.1.2.3.4 + + 5. Reverse the order of the digits. Example: 4.3.2.1.6.7.9.8.6.4 + + 6. Append the string ".e164.arpa" to the end. Example: + 4.3.2.1.6.7.9.8.6.4.e164.arpa + +2.1 Special note about the '+' + + The '+' is kept in stage 2 in section 2 to flag that the number which + the regular expression is operating on is a E.164 number. Future + work will be needed to determine how other numbering plans (such as + closed ones) might be identified. It is possible, but not definite, + that they would use a similar mechanism as the one described in this + document. + +3. Fetching URIs given an E.164 number + + For a record in DNS, the NAPTR record is used for identifying + available ways of contacting a specific node identified by that name. + Specifically, it can be used for knowing what services exists for a + specific domain name, including phone numbers by the use of the + e164.arpa domain as described above. + + The identification is using the NAPTR resource record defined for use + in the URN resolution process, but it can be generalized in a way + that suits the needs specified in this document. + + + + +Faltstrom Standards Track [Page 2] + +RFC 2916 E.164 number and DNS September 2000 + + + It is the string which is the result of step 2 in section 2 above + which is input to the NAPTR algorithm. + +3.1 The NAPTR record + + The key fields in the NAPTR RR are order, preference, service, flags, + regexp, and replacement. For a detailed description, see: + + o The order field specifies the order in which records MUST be + processed when multiple NAPTR records are returned in response to + a single query. + + o The preference field specifies the order in which records SHOULD + be processed when multiple NAPTR records have the same value of + "order". + + o The service field specifies the resolution protocol and resolution + service(s) that will be available if the rewrite specified by the + regexp or replacement fields is applied. + + o The flags field contains modifiers that affect what happens in the + next DNS lookup, typically for optimizing the process. + + o The regexp field is one of two fields used for the rewrite rules, + and is the core concept of the NAPTR record. + + o The replacement field is the other field that may be used for the + rewrite rule. + + Note that the client applies all the substitutions and performs all + lookups, they are not performed in the DNS servers. Note that URIs + are stored in the regexp field. + +3.1.1 Specification for use of NAPTR Resource Records + + The input is an E.164 encoded telephone number. The output is a + Uniform Resource Identifier in its absolute form according to the + 'absoluteURI' production in the Collected ABNF found in RFC2396 [5] + + An E.164 number, without any characters but leading '+' and digits, + (result of step 2 in section 2 above) is the input to the NAPTR + algorithm. + + The service supported for a call is E2U. + + + + + + + +Faltstrom Standards Track [Page 3] + +RFC 2916 E.164 number and DNS September 2000 + + +3.1.2 Specification of Service E2U (E.164 to URI) + + * Name: E.164 to URI + * Mnemonic: E2U + * Number of Operands: 1 + * Type of Each Operand: First operand is an E.164 number. + * Format of Each Operand: First operand is the E.164 number in the + form as specified in step 2 in section 2 in this document. + * Algorithm: Opaque + * Output: One or more URIs + * Error Conditions: + o E.164 number not in the numbering plan + o E.164 number in the numbering plan, but no URIs exist for + that number + o Service unavailable + + * Security Considerations: + o Malicious Redirection + One of the fundamental dangers related to any service such + as this is that a malicious entry in a resolver's database + will cause clients to resolve the E.164 into the wrong URI. + The possible intent may be to cause the client to retrieve + a resource containing fraudulent or damaging material. + o Denial of Service + By removing the URI to which the E.164 maps, a malicious + intruder may remove the client's ability to access the + resource. + + This operation is used to map a one E.164 number to a list of URIs. + The first well-known step in the resolution process is to remove all + non-digits apart from the leading '+' from the E.164 number as + described in step 1 and 2 in section 2 of this document. + +3.2 Examples + +3.2.1 Example 1 + +$ORIGIN 4.3.2.1.6.7.9.8.6.4.e164.arpa. + IN NAPTR 100 10 "u" "sip+E2U" "!^.*$!sip:info@tele2.se!" . + IN NAPTR 102 10 "u" "mailto+E2U" "!^.*$!mailto:info@tele2.se!" . + + This describes that the domain 4.3.2.1.6.7.9.8.6.4.e164.arpa is + preferably contacted by SIP, and secondly by SMTP. + + In both cases, the next step in the resolution process is to use the + resolution mechanism for each of the protocols, (SIP and SMTP) to + know what node to contact for each. + + + + +Faltstrom Standards Track [Page 4] + +RFC 2916 E.164 number and DNS September 2000 + + +3.2.2 Example 2 + +$ORIGIN 4.3.2.1.6.7.9.8.6.4.e164.arpa. + IN NAPTR 10 10 "u" "sip+E2U" "!^.*$!sip:paf@swip.net!" . + IN NAPTR 102 10 "u" "mailto+E2U" "!^.*$!mailto:paf@swip.net!" . + IN NAPTR 102 10 "u" "tel+E2U" "!^.*$!tel:+4689761234!" . + + Note that the preferred method is to use the SIP protocol, but the + result of the rewrite of the NAPTR record is a URI (the "u" flag in + the NAPTR record). In the case of the protocol SIP, the URI might be + a SIP URI, which is resolved as described in RFC 2543 [6]. In the + case of the "tel" URI scheme [7], the procedure is restarted with + this new E.164 number. The client is responsible for loop detection. + + The rest of the resolution of the routing is done as described above. + +3.2.3 Example 3 + + $ORIGIN 6.4.e164.arpa. + * IN NAPTR 100 10 "u" "ldap+E2U" "!^+46(.*)$!ldap://ldap.se/cn=01!" . + + We see in this example that information about all E.164 numbers in + the 46 countrycode (for Sweden) exists in an LDAP server, and the + search to do is specified by the LDAP URI [8]. + +4. IANA Considerations + + This memo requests that the IANA delegate the E164.ARPA domain + following instructions to be provided by the IAB. Names within this + zone are to be delegated to parties according to the ITU + recommendation E.164. The names allocated should be hierarchic in + accordance with ITU Recommendation E.164, and the codes should + assigned in accordance with that Recommendation. + + Delegations in the zone e164.arpa (not delegations in delegated + domains of e164.arpa) should be done after Expert Review, and the + IESG will appoint a designated expert. + +5. Security Considerations + + As this system is built on top of DNS, one can not be sure that the + information one get back from DNS is more secure than any DNS query. + To solve that, the use of DNSSEC [9] for securing and verifying zones + is to be recommended. + + + + + + + +Faltstrom Standards Track [Page 5] + +RFC 2916 E.164 number and DNS September 2000 + + + The caching in DNS can make the propagation time for a change take + the same amount of time as the time to live for the NAPTR records in + the zone that is changed. The use of this in an environment where + IP-addresses are for hire (for example, when using DHCP [11]) must + therefore be done very carefully. + + There are a number of countries (and other numbering environments) in + which there are multiple providers of call routing and number/name- + translation services. In these areas, any system that permits users, + or putative agents for users, to change routing or supplier + information may provide incentives for changes that are actually + unauthorized (and, in some cases, for denial of legitimate change + requests). Such environments should be designed with adequate + mechanisms for identification and authentication of those requesting + changes and for authorization of those changes. + +6. Acknowledgements + + Support and ideas have come from people at Ericsson, Bjorn Larsson + and the group which implemented this scheme in their lab to see that + it worked. Input has also come from ITU-T SG2, Working Party 1/2 + (Numbering, Routing, Global Mobility and Service Definition), the + ENUM working group in the IETF, John Klensin and Leif Sunnegardh. + +References + + [1] Mealling, M. and R. Daniel, "The Naming Authority Pointer + (NAPTR) DNS Resource Record", RFC 2915, September 2000. + + [2] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", STD + 13, RFC 1034, November 1987. + + [3] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and + specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. + + [4] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement + Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. + + [5] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R.T. and L. Masinter, "Uniform + Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396, August + 1998. + + [6] Handley, M., Schulzrinne, H., Schooler, E. and J. Rosenberg, + "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 2543, March 1999. + + [7] Vaha-Sipila, A., "URLs for Telephone Calls", RFC 2806, April + 2000. + + + + +Faltstrom Standards Track [Page 6] + +RFC 2916 E.164 number and DNS September 2000 + + + [8] Howes, T. and M. Smith, "An LDAP URL Format", RFC 1959, June + 1996. + + [9] Eastlake, D., "Domain Name System Security Extensions", RFC + 2535, March 1999. + + [10] Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P. and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for + specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782, + February 2000. + + [11] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", RFC 2131, + March 1997. + +Author's Address + + Patrik Faltstrom + Cisco Systems Inc + 170 W Tasman Drive SJ-13/2 + San Jose CA 95134 + USA + + EMail: paf@cisco.com + URI: http://www.cisco.com + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Faltstrom Standards Track [Page 7] + +RFC 2916 E.164 number and DNS September 2000 + + +Appendix A. Scenario + + Say that the content of the e164.arpa zone is the following: + + $ORIGIN e164.arpa. + 6.4 IN NS ns.regulator-e164.example.se. + + The regulator has in turn given a series of 10000 numbers to the + telco with the name Telco-A. The regulator because of that has in + his DNS. + + $ORIGIN 6.4.e164.arpa. + 6.7.9.8 IN NS ns.telco-a.example.se. + + A user named Sven Svensson has from Telco A got the phone number + +46-8-9761234. The user gets the service of running DNS from the + company Redirection Service. Sven Svensson has asked Telco A to + point out Redirection Service as the authoritative source for + information about the number +46-8-9761234. Telco A because of this + puts in his DNS the following. + + $ORIGIN 6.7.9.8.6.4.e164.arpa. + 4.3.2.1 IN NS ns.redirection-service.example.se. + + Sven Svensson has already plain telephony from Telco A, but also a + SIP service from the company Sip Service which provides Sven with + the SIP URI "sip:sven@sips.se". The ISP with the name + ISP A runs email and webpages for Sven, under the email address + sven@ispa.se, and URI http://svensson.ispa.se. + + The DNS for the redirection service because of this contains the + following. + + $ORIGIN 4.3.2.1.6.7.9.8.6.4.e164.arpa. + IN NAPTR 10 10 "u" "sip+E2U" "!^.*$!sip:sven@sips.se!" . + IN NAPTR 10 10 "u" "mailto+E2U" "!^.*$!mailto:sven@ispa.se!" . + IN NAPTR 10 10 "u" "http+E2U" "!^.*$!http://svensson.ispa.se!" . + IN NAPTR 10 10 "u" "tel+E2U" "!^.*$!tel:+46-8-9761234!" . + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Faltstrom Standards Track [Page 8] + +RFC 2916 E.164 number and DNS September 2000 + + + A user, John Smith, want to contact Sven Svensson, he to start with + only has the E.164 number of Sven, i.e. +46-8-9761234. He takes the + number, and enters the number in his communication client, which + happen to know how to handle the SIP protocol. The client removes + the dashes, and ends up with the E.164 number +4689761234. That is + what is used in the algorithm for NAPTR records, which is as + follows. + + The client converts the E.164 number into the domain name + 4.3.2.1.6.7.9.8.6.4.e164.arpa., and queries for NAPTR records for + this domainname. Using DNS mechanisms which includes following the + NS record referrals, the following records are returned: + + $ORIGIN 4.3.2.1.6.7.9.8.6.4.e164.arpa. + IN NAPTR 10 10 "u" "sip+E2U" "!^.*$!sip:sven@sips.se" . + IN NAPTR 10 10 "u" "mailto+E2U" "!^.*$!mailto:sven@ispa.se" . + IN NAPTR 10 10 "u" "http+E2U" "!^.*$!http://svensson.ispa.se" . + IN NAPTR 10 10 "u" "tel+E2U" "!^.*$!tel:+46-8-9761234" . + + Because the client knows sip, the first record above is selected, + and the regular expression "!^.*$!sip:sven@sips.se" is applied to + the original string, "+4689761234". The output is "sip:sven@sips.se" + which is used according to SIP resolution. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Faltstrom Standards Track [Page 9] + +RFC 2916 E.164 number and DNS September 2000 + + +Full Copyright Statement + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000). All Rights Reserved. + + This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to + others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it + or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published + and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any + kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are + included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this + document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing + the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other + Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of + developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for + copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be + followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than + English. + + The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be + revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. + + This document and the information contained herein is provided on an + "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING + TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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. + +Acknowledgement + + Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the + Internet Society. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Faltstrom Standards Track [Page 10] + |