RFC 7535
AS112 Redirection Using DNAME

Non-hyperlinked document RFC index
Add to your favorites

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                          J. Abley
Request for Comments: 7535                                     Dyn, Inc.
Category: Informational                                       B. Dickson
ISSN: 2070-1721                                            Twitter, Inc.
                                                               W. Kumari
                                                           G. Michaelson
                                                                May 2015

AS112 Redirection Using DNAME


   AS112 provides a mechanism for handling reverse lookups on IP
   addresses that are not unique (e.g., RFC 1918 addresses).  This
   document describes modifications to the deployment and use of AS112
   infrastructure that will allow zones to be added and dropped much
   more easily, using DNAME resource records.

   This approach makes it possible for any DNS zone administrator to
   sink traffic relating to parts of the global DNS namespace under
   their control to the AS112 infrastructure without coordination with
   the operators of AS112 infrastructure.

Status of This Memo

   This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
   published for informational purposes.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not all documents
   approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet
   Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at

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 ....................................................3
   2. Design Overview .................................................4
   3. AS112 Operations ................................................5
      3.1. Extensions to Support DNAME Redirection ....................5
      3.2. Redirection of Query Traffic to AS112 Servers ..............5
   4. Continuity of AS112 Operations ..................................6
   5. Candidate Zones for AS112 Redirection ...........................6
   6. DNAME Deployment Considerations .................................7
   7. IAB Statement Regarding This .ARPA Request ......................8
   8. IANA Considerations .............................................8
      8.1. Address Assignment .........................................8
      8.2. Hosting of AS112.ARPA .....................................10
      8.3. Delegation of AS112.ARPA ..................................10
   9. Security Considerations ........................................10
   10. References ....................................................11
      10.1. Normative References .....................................11
      10.2. Informative References ...................................11
   Appendix A. Assessing Support for DNAME in the Real World .........13
     A.1. Methodology ................................................13
     A.2. Results ....................................................15
   Acknowledgements ..................................................16
   Authors' Addresses ................................................16

1.  Introduction Go to the top of this page...top

   Many sites connected to the Internet make use of IPv4 addresses that
   are not globally unique.  Examples are the addresses designated in
   [RFC1918] for private use within individual sites.

   Devices in such environments may occasionally originate Domain Name
   System (DNS) queries (so-called "reverse lookups") corresponding to
   those private-use addresses.  Since the addresses concerned have only
   local significance, it is good practice for site administrators to
   ensure that such queries are answered locally.  However, it is not
   uncommon for such queries to follow the normal delegation path in the
   public DNS instead of being answered within the site.

   It is not possible for public DNS servers to give useful answers to
   such queries.  In addition, due to the wide deployment of private-use
   addresses and the continuing growth of the Internet, the volume of
   such queries is large and growing.  The AS112 project aims to provide
   a distributed sink for such queries in order to reduce the load on
   the IN-ADDR.ARPA authoritative servers.  The AS112 project is named
   after the Autonomous System Number (ASN) that was assigned to it.

   Prior to implementation of this technique, the AS112 project did not
   accommodate the addition and removal of DNS zones elegantly.  Since
   additional zones of definitively local significance are known to
   exist, this presents a problem.  This document describes
   modifications to the deployment and use of AS112 infrastructure that
   will allow zones to be added and dropped much more easily.

   The AS112 project is described in detail in [RFC7534].

   The AS112 nameservers (PRISONER.IANA.ORG, BLACKHOLE-1.IANA.ORG, and
   BLACKHOLE-2.IANA.ORG) are required to answer authoritatively for each
   and every zone that is delegated to them.  If a zone is delegated to
   AS112 nameservers without those nameservers being configured ahead of
   time to answer authoritatively for that zone, there is a detrimental
   impact on clients following referrals for queries within that zone.
   This misconfiguration is colloquially known as a "lame delegation".

   AS112 nameserver operators are only loosely coordinated, and hence
   adding support for a new zone (or, correspondingly, removing support
   for a zone that is no longer delegated to the AS112 nameservers) is
   difficult to accomplish with accuracy.  Testing AS112 nameservers
   remotely to see whether they are configured to answer authoritatively
   for a particular zone is similarly challenging, since AS112 nodes are
   distributed using anycast [RFC4786].
   This document defines a more flexible approach for sinking queries on
   AS112 infrastructure that can be deployed alongside unmodified,
   existing AS112 nodes.  Instead of delegating additional zones
   directly to AS112 nameservers, DNAME [RFC6672] redirection is used.
   This approach has the advantage that query traffic for arbitrary
   parts of the namespace can be directed to AS112 servers without those
   servers having to be reconfigured every time a zone is added or

   This approach makes it possible for any DNS zone administrator to
   sink traffic relating to parts of the global DNS namespace under
   their control to the AS112 infrastructure without coordination with
   the operators of AS112 infrastructure.

2.  Design Overview Go to the top of this page...top

   A new zone, EMPTY.AS112.ARPA, is delegated to a single nameserver
   BLACKHOLE.AS112.ARPA (IPv4 address, IPv6 address

   The IPv4 address has been selected from the prefix
   assigned by the IANA such that the address is coverable by a single
   IPv4 /24 prefix, and that no other address covered by that prefix is
   in use.  The IPv6 address 2001:4:112::1 has been similarly assigned
   such that no other address within a covering /48 is in use.  This
   addressing plan accommodates the anycast distribution of the
   BLACKHOLE.AS112.ARPA service using a single IPv4 service prefix and a
   single IPv6 service prefix.  See [RFC4786] for more discussion of
   anycast service distribution; see Section 8 for the specific actions
   completed by IANA per this document.

   Some or all of the existing AS112 nodes should be extended to support
   these new nameserver addresses and to host the EMPTY.AS112.ARPA zone.
   See [RFC7534] for revised guidance to AS112 server operators.

   Each part of the DNS namespace for which it is desirable to sink
   queries at AS112 nameservers should be redirected to the
   EMPTY.AS112.ARPA zone using DNAME [RFC6672].  See Section 3.2 for
   guidance to zone administrators.

3.  AS112 Operations Go to the top of this page...top

3.1.  Extensions To Support DNAME Redirection Go to the top of this page...top

   Guidance to operators of AS112 nodes is extended to include
   configuration of the and 2001:4:112::1 addresses, and
   the corresponding announcement of covering routes for those
   addresses, and to host the EMPTY.AS112.ARPA zone.

   IPv4-only AS112 nodes should only configure the
   nameserver address; IPv6-only AS112 nodes should only configure the
   2001:4:112::1 nameserver address.

   It is only necessary for a single AS112 server operator to implement
   these extensions for this mechanism to function as intended.  It is
   beneficial if many more than one AS112 server operator makes these
   changes, however, since that provides for greater distribution and
   capacity for the nameservers serving the EMPTY.AS112.ARPA zone.  It
   is not necessary for all AS112 server operators to make these changes
   for the mechanism to be viable.

   Detailed instructions for the implementation of these extensions are
   included in [RFC7534].

3.2.  Redirection Of Query Traffic To AS112 Servers Go to the top of this page...top

   Once the EMPTY.AS112.ARPA zone has been deployed using the
   nameservers described in Section 3.1, redirections may be installed
   in the DNS namespace for queries that are intended to be answered by
   the AS112 infrastructure.

   For example, reverse queries corresponding to TEST-NET-1
   ( [RFC5737] could be redirected to AS112 nameservers by
   installing a DNAME resource record in the 192.IN-ADDR.ARPA zone, as
   illustrated in Figure 1.

     2.0     IN      DNAME   EMPTY.AS112.ARPA.

                                 Figure 1

   There is no practical limit to the number of redirections that can be
   configured in this fashion.  Redirection of a particular part of the
   namespace to EMPTY.AS112.ARPA can be removed at any time, under the
   control of the administrators of the corresponding part of the DNS
   namespace.  No changes to deployed AS112 nodes incorporating the
   extensions described in this document are required to support
   additional redirections.  A list of possible candidates for AS112
   redirection can be found in Section 5.

   DNAME resource records deployed for this purpose can be signed with
   DNSSEC [RFC4033], providing a secure means of authenticating the
   legitimacy of each redirection.

4.  Continuity Of AS112 Operations Go to the top of this page...top

   Existing guidance to AS112 server operators to accept and respond to
   queries directed at the PRISONER.IANA.ORG, BLACKHOLE-1.IANA.ORG, and
   BLACKHOLE-2.IANA.ORG nameservers should continue to be followed, and
   no changes to the delegation of existing zones hosted on AS112
   servers should occur.  These measures are intended to provide
   continuity of operations for zones currently delegated to AS112
   servers and avoid any accidental client impact due to the changes
   proposed in this document.

   Once it has become empirically and quantitatively clear that the
   EMPTY.AS112.ARPA zone is well hosted to the extent that it is thought
   that the existing, unmodified AS112 servers host 10.IN-ADDR.ARPA, the
   decision might be made to replace the delegation of those [RFC1918]
   zones with DNAME redirection.  Once implemented, the
   nameservers could be retired.  This document gives no such direction
   to the IANA, however.

5.  Candidate Zones For AS112 Redirection Go to the top of this page...top

   All zones listed in [RFC6303] are candidates for AS112 redirection.

   Since no pre-provisioning is required on the part of AS112 operators
   to facilitate sinking of any name in the DNS namespace by AS112
   infrastructure, this mechanism supports AS112 redirection by any zone
   owner in the DNS.

   This document is simply concerned with provision of the AS112
   redirection service and does not specify that any particular AS112
   redirection be put in place.

6.  DNAME Deployment Considerations Go to the top of this page...top

   DNAME was specified years after the original implementations of
   [RFC1035], and hence universal deployment cannot be expected.
   [RFC6672] specifies a fallback mechanism that makes use of
   synthesised CNAME RRSets for this reason.  The expectation that
   design choices in the DNAME specification ought to mitigate any lack
   of deployment is reviewed below.  Experimental validation of those
   expectations is included in Appendix A.

   It is a fundamental design requirement of AS112 service that
   responses be cached.  We can safely declare DNAME support on the
   authoritative server to be a prerequisite for DNAME redirection, but
   the cases where individual elements in resolver chains do not support
   DNAME processing deserve closer examination.

   The expected behaviour when a DNAME response is supplied to a
   resolver that does not support DNAME is that the accompanying,
   synthesised CNAME will be accepted and cached.  Re-query frequency
   will be determined by the TTLs (Time to Live) returned by the
   DNAME-responding authoritative servers.

   Resolution of the CNAME target is straightforward and functions
   exactly as the AS112 project has operated since it was deployed.  The
   negative caching [RFC2308] of the CNAME target follows the parameters
   defined in the target zone, EMPTY.AS112.ARPA.  This has the side
   effects that all redirected names ultimately landing on an AS112 node
   will be negatively cached with the same parameters, but this lack of
   flexibility seems non-controversial; the effect of reducing the
   negative cache TTL would be increased query volume on the AS112 node
   operator concerned, and hence controls seem well aligned with

   Validating resolvers (i.e., those requesting and processing DNSSEC
   [RFC4033] metadata) are required to implement DNAME and hence should
   not make use of synthesised CNAME RRs.  The lack of signature over a
   received CNAME RR should hence not limit the ability to sign the
   (DNAME) redirection point, and for those (DNAME) signatures to be

   In the case where a recursive server implements DNAME but DNAME is
   not implemented in a stub resolver, CNAME synthesis will again
   provide a viable path.

   DNAME support on AS112 nodes themselves is never required under this

7.  IAB Statement Regarding This .ARPA Request Go to the top of this page...top

   With the publication of this document, the IAB approves of the
   delegation of 'AS112' in the ARPA domain.  Under [RFC3172], the IAB
   has requested that IANA delegate and provision "AS112.ARPA" as
   specified in this specification.  However, the IAB does not take any
   architectural or technical position about this specification.

8.  IANA Considerations Go to the top of this page...top

8.1.  Address Assignment Go to the top of this page...top

   Per this document, IANA has assigned IPv4 and IPv6 number resources
   in conformance with Section 4 of [RFC2860].

   The IANA has assigned one IPv4 /24 netblock and registered its use in
   the "IANA IPv4 Special-Purpose Address Registry" [RFC6890] as

                | Name                 | Value           |
                | Address Block        | |
                |                      |                 |
                | Name                 | AS112-v4        |
                |                      |                 |
                | RFC                  | RFC 7535        |
                |                      |                 |
                | Allocation Date      | 2014-12         |
                |                      |                 |
                | Termination Date     | N/A             |
                |                      |                 |
                | Source               | True            |
                |                      |                 |
                | Destination          | True            |
                |                      |                 |
                | Forwardable          | True            |
                |                      |                 |
                | Global               | True            |
                |                      |                 |
                | Reserved-by-Protocol | False           |
   IANA has assigned one IPv6 /48 netblock and registered its use in the
   "IANA IPv6 Special-Purpose Address Registry" [RFC6890] as follows:

                | Name                 | Value           |
                | Address Block        | 2001:4:112::/48 |
                |                      |                 |
                | Name                 | AS112-v6        |
                |                      |                 |
                | RFC                  | RFC 7535        |
                |                      |                 |
                | Allocation Date      | 2014-12         |
                |                      |                 |
                | Termination Date     | N/A             |
                |                      |                 |
                | Source               | True            |
                |                      |                 |
                | Destination          | True            |
                |                      |                 |
                | Forwardable          | True            |
                |                      |                 |
                | Global               | True            |
                |                      |                 |
                | Reserved-by-Protocol | False           |

8.2.  Hosting Of AS112.ARPA Go to the top of this page...top

   The IANA hosts and signs the zone AS112.ARPA using nameservers and
   DNSSEC signing infrastructure of their choosing, as shown in
   Figure 2.  SOA RDATA may be adjusted by the IANA to suit their
   operational requirements.

   $TTL 3600

   @       IN      SOA     BLACKHOLE.AS112.ARPA. NOC.DNS.ICANN.ORG. (
                                   1               ; serial
                                   10800           ; refresh
                                   3600            ; retry
                                   1209600         ; expire
                                   3600 )          ; negative cache TTL

                   NS      A.IANA-SERVERS.NET.
                   NS      B.IANA-SERVERS.NET.
                   NS      C.IANA-SERVERS.NET.

   BLACKHOLE       A
                   AAAA    2001:4:112::1


   EMPTY           NS      BLACKHOLE

                                 Figure 2

8.3.  Delegation Of AS112.ARPA Go to the top of this page...top

   The IANA has arranged delegation from the ARPA zone according to
   normal IANA procedure for ARPA zone management, to the nameservers
   used in carrying out the direction in Section 8.2.  The whois contact
   information for the new record is specified by the IAB under

9.  Security Considerations Go to the top of this page...top

   This document presents no known additional security concerns to the

   For security considerations relating to AS112 service in general, see

10.  References Go to the top of this page...top

10.1.  Normative References Go to the top of this page...top

   [RFC1035]  Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
              specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, DOI 10.17487/RFC1035,
              November 1987, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1035>.

   [RFC2308]  Andrews, M., "Negative Caching of DNS Queries (DNS
              NCACHE)", RFC 2308, DOI 10.17487/RFC2308, March 1998,

   [RFC6672]  Rose, S. and W. Wijngaards, "DNAME Redirection in the
              DNS", RFC 6672, DOI 10.17487/RFC6672, June 2012,

   [RFC7534]  Abley, J. and W. Sotomayor, "AS112 Nameserver Operations",
              RFC 7534, DOI 10.17487/RFC7534, May 2015,

10.2.  Informative References Go to the top of this page...top

   [RFC1918]  Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, B., Karrenberg, D., de Groot, G.,
              and E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets",
              BCP 5, RFC 1918, DOI 10.17487/RFC1918, February 1996,

   [RFC2860]  Carpenter, B., Baker, F., and M. Roberts, "Memorandum of
              Understanding Concerning the Technical Work of the
              Internet Assigned Numbers Authority", RFC 2860,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2860, June 2000,

   [RFC3172]  Huston, G., Ed., "Management Guidelines & Operational
              Requirements for the Address and Routing Parameter Area
              Domain ("arpa")", BCP 52, RFC 3172, DOI 10.17487/RFC3172,
              September 2001, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3172>.

   [RFC4033]  Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
              Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements",
              RFC 4033, DOI 10.17487/RFC4033, March 2005,

   [RFC4786]  Abley, J. and K. Lindqvist, "Operation of Anycast
              Services", BCP 126, RFC 4786, DOI 10.17487/RFC4786,
              December 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4786>.
   [RFC5737]  Arkko, J., Cotton, M., and L. Vegoda, "IPv4 Address Blocks
              Reserved for Documentation", RFC 5737,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5737, January 2010,

   [RFC6303]  Andrews, M., "Locally Served DNS Zones", BCP 163,
              RFC 6303, DOI 10.17487/RFC6303, July 2011,

   [RFC6890]  Cotton, M., Vegoda, L., Bonica, R., Ed., and B. Haberman,
              "Special-Purpose IP Address Registries", BCP 153,
              RFC 6890, DOI 10.17487/RFC6890, April 2013,

Appendix A.  Assessing Support for DNAME in the Real World

   To measure the extent to which the DNAME construct is supported in
   the Internet, we have used an experimental technique to test the DNS
   resolvers used by end hosts and derive from the test a measurement of
   DNAME support within the Internet.

A.1.  Methodology

   The test was conducted by loading a user's browser with four URLs
   to retrieve.  The first three comprise the test setup, while the
   final URL communicates the result to the experiment controller.
   The URLs are:

   A  http://a.<unique_string>.dname.example.com/1x1.png?

   B  http://b.dname.example.com/1x1.png?

   C  http://c.<unique_string>.target.example.net/1x1.png?

   D  http://results.recorder.example.net/1x1.png?

   The A URL is designed to test the end user's capability to resolve a
   name that has never been seen before, so that the resolution of this
   domain name will reliably result in a query at the authoritative
   nameserver.  This is intended to test the use of domain names where
   there is a dynamic component that also uses the DNAME construct.

   The B URL is deliberately designed to be cached by caching resolvers
   that are used in the process of resolving the domain name.

   The C URL is a control URL.  This is a unique URL, similar to A, but
   does not refer to a DNAME structure.

   The D URL uses a static cacheable domain name.

   The <unique_string> value is common to the four URLs used in each
   individual instance of this test but varies from test to test.  The
   result is that each end user is presented with a unique string.
   The contents of the EXAMPLE.COM, TARGET.EXAMPLE.NET, and
   RECORDER.EXAMPLE.NET zones are shown in Figure 3.


     B                  IN  A
     *                  IN  A

     RESULTS            IN  A

                                 Figure 3

   The first three URLs (A, B, and C) are loaded as tasks into the
   user's browser upon execution of the test's script.  The script
   starts a timer with each of these URLs to measure the elapsed time to
   fetch the URL.  The script then waits for the three fetches to
   complete, or 10 seconds, whichever occurs first.  The script then
   loads the results of the three timers into the GET arguments of the
   D URL and performs a fetch to pass these results back to the
   experiment's server.

   Logs on the web server reached at RESULTS.RECORDER.EXAMPLE.NET will
   include entries of the form shown in Figure 4.  If any of the URLs
   fail to load within 10 seconds, the D URL will report the failure as
   a "null" timer value.

     GET /1x1.png?results.<unique_string>?za=1822&zb=1674&zc=1582
     GET /1x1.png?results.<unique_string>?za=null&zb=null&zc=161

                                 Figure 4

   The script has been encoded in Adobe Flash with a simple image in the
   form of an online advertisement.  An online advertisement network has
   been used to distribute the script.  The script is invoked when the
   advertisement is presented in the end user's browser or application
   and does not require the user to click on the supplied image in any
   way.  The advertisement placement parameters were set to the broadest
   possible scope to sample users from across the entire Internet.

A.2.  Results

   The test was loaded into an advertisement distributed on 2013-10-10
   and 2013-10-11.

               |                    |   Count | Percentage |
               | Recorded Results:  | 338,478 |            |
               |                    |         |            |
               | A or B Loaded:     | 331,896 |      98.1% |
               |                    |         |            |
               | A Fail and B Fail: |   6,492 |       1.9% |
               |                    |         |            |
               | A Fail and B Load: |   4,249 |       1.3% |
               |                    |         |            |
               | A Load and B Fail: |   1,624 |       0.5% |
               |                    |         |            |
               | C Fail:            |   9,355 |       2.8% |

                                  Table 1

   These results indicate that at most 1.9% of tested clients use DNS
   resolvers that fail to resolve a domain name that contains a DNAME
   redirection.  However, the failure rate of slightly lower than 3% for
   the control URL indicates that the failure rate for the DNAME
   construct lies within the bounds of error within the experimental
   framework.  We conclude that there is no evidence of a consistent
   failure on the part of deployed DNS resolvers to correctly resolve a
   DNAME construct.

   This experiment was conducted by Geoff Huston and George Michaelson.

Acknowledgements Go to the top of this page...top

   The authors acknowledge the valuable contributions of Bob Harold and
   other participants in the DNSOP working group in the preparation of
   this document.

Authors' Addresses Go to the top of this page...top

   Joe Abley
   Dyn, Inc.
   103-186 Albert Street
   London, ON  N6A 1M1

   Phone: +1 519 670 9327
   EMail: jabley@dyn.com

   Brian Dickson
   Twitter, Inc.

   EMail: bdickson@twitter.com

   Warren Kumari
   1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
   Mountain View, CA  94043
   United States

   EMail: warren@kumari.net

   George Michaelson

   EMail: ggm@apnic.net