分享
 
 
 

RFC1401 - Correspondence between the IAB and DISA on the use of DNS

王朝other·作者佚名  2008-05-31
窄屏简体版  字體: |||超大  

Network Working Group Internet Architecture Board

Request for Comments: 1401 Lyman Chapin, Chair

January 1993

Correspondence between the IAB and DISA on the use of

DNS throughout the Internet

Status of this Memo

This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does

not specify an Internet standard. Distribution of this memo is

unlimited.

Abstract

This memo reprodUCes three letters exchanged between the Internet

Activities Board (IAB) and the Defense Information Systems Agency

(DISA) regarding the importance of using the Domain Name System (DNS)

throughout the Internet, and phasing out the use of older host name

to address tables, such as "hosts.txt".

1. Letter from the IAB to DISA

30 March, 1992

To: Members of the Federal Networking Council,

Members of the Federal Networking Advisory Council,

Colonel Ken Thomas, Chairman,

DoD Protocol Standards Steering Group, DISA/Center for

Standards

CC: C. J. Pasquariello, Associate Director, Center for Standards,

LCDR, David Chappell, Executive Secretary,

PSSG, DISA/Center for Standards

Eduardo Schonborn, Dep Director/DDN PMO

As the IAB, together with others in the Internet Engineering and

Research Task Forces, contemplates the challenges inherent in dealing

with an eXPonentially expanding Internet, the critical need for

widespread adoption of a uniform Domain Name service is very

apparent.

The attached memorandum is offered by the Internet Activities Board

for your consideration regarding technical policy concerning domain

naming in the US portion of the Internet. The proposed technical

policy is recommended world-wide and will be offered as an RFCfor

that purpose. Adoption of such a policy would, we believe, much

enhance the operational efficiency of the existing world-wide

Internet backbone and major networks dependent upon it, including the

DDN Milnet.

Your consideration of this policy question is urged in the strongest

possible terms. We would much appreciate hearing the views of the

Protocol Standards Steering Group by April 20, 1992.

Regards,

A. Lyman Chapin

Chairman, Internet Activities Board

Attachment

The Domain Name System is an Internet Necessity

Internet Activities Board

February 1992

Over the last several years, the Internet has evolved in size so

extensively that it has become infeasible to provide directory

services through a database maintained at a single, central

repository. Both the size and the dynamics of the required data make

such an approach impractical. Recognizing this problem several years

ago [1], the Internet community has adopted the Domain Name System

[2-5] as the principal means of achieving host name to IP address

mappings. During this time, almost the entire Internet has converted

from the use of the static name-to-address mapping tables thus far

centrally maintained at the DDN Network Information Center, to the

use of the more dynamic, up-to-date address mapping provided by DNS

mechanism.

There are still large fractions of the Internet community which rely

on the use of a centrally-maintained file ("hosts.txt") to accomplish

this mapping function. The MILNET community appears to have

substantial pockets of dependence on table-driven mappings, for

example. Although a plan for achieving a MILNET transition to use of

the Domain Name System was worked out in 1987, the transition is

incomplete and, as a result, naming services (i.e., host name lookups

on the MILNET) are many times still provided via static tables rather

than the distributed, and far more accurate, Domain Name System.

Ironically, most of the commercial, off-the-shelf software for TCP/IP

supports the user of the Domain Name System, so a policy of uniform

support and application of DNS would go a long way toward improving

the Defense Department data communication infrastructure, insofar as

it is dependent on TCP/IP to interconnect hosts on LANs and WANs.

The use of different means for name-to-address mappings by different

parties in the network community leads to unsynchronized and

inconsistent databases, which inevitably result in reachability

failures by users attempting to connect to network resources.

Moreover, the special facilities of the Domain Name System, such as

the MX (Mail eXchange) record, make it possible to include systems

not directly on the Internet into the universe of addressable

parties. MX records also allow a network administrator to prioritize

a list of alternative e-mail relays in case the final destination is

not reachable. Systems which do not support MX records, but rather

still depend on the "hosts.txt" information, pose a serious obstacle

to network connectivity, as well as to the operation and management

of the highly connected Internet.

Non-DNS systems on the Internet will eventually be confronted with

the need to decide whether they want to continue as a part of the

larger Internet community, or remain a rather small, non-conforming

subset. Should they choose not to conform to the otherwise accepted

Domain Name System, they will have to accept the ramifications of

this decision. In particular, they will have to accept that the rest

of the community may, indeed has already started to, essentially

ignore those static files which reflect the principal non-DNS naming

service. The larger community has evolved so extensively beyond

these configurations, that these files are not only obsolete as a

technology, but also incomplete and often inaccurate in the present

implementation. Upon connecting a new host to the Internet, the

great majority of the Internet community no longer considers the

registration of host name/address updates to the NIC database a

necessity, and rather focuses on updating the Domain name System.

Therefore, today's NIC database, and the "hosts.txt" file generated

from it, largely reflects only the non-DNS community, a tiny subset

of the hundreds of thousands of entities configured into the Internet

name space via the DNS.

If the non-DNS users maintain a requirement for the use of static

mapping tables, at least some mechanism should exist to augment the

NIC data sets with additional information represented by the Domain

Name System. These more comprehensive tables, accompanied by a

method to guarantee synchronization with the DNS, would significantly

improve the accuracy of the information which non-DNS users apply to

map between names and addresses. However, this solution will not

address the need for support of the richer DNS functionality by the

NIC's system. At a minimum, the incorporation of MX information into

the NIC database is imperative for compatibility between the

"hosts.txt" file and the DNS. Network subcommunities which choose to

maintain a separate and incompatible mapping system will have a

partitioning effect on the subcommunities themselves, but also a

detrimental impact on overall Internet operations. Both end-users

and system and network administrators will inevitably find themselves

devoting considerable attention to tracing inconsistency problems

arising from the discrepancy in mapping methods.

The Internet Activities Board, recognizing the need for universal

interoperability and consistent naming mechanisms, and benefitting

from several years of experience with the Domain Name System, is

advocating a policy that all connected components of the Internet

community should adopt the DNS, and urges parties having policy-

setting authority to adopt the same position and undertake to set

deadlines for conversion to uniform use of DNS.

References

1. J.B. Postel and J.K. Reynolds, Domain Requirements, RFC920,

October 1984.

2. P.V. Mockapetris, Domain Names - Concepts and Facilities,

RFC1034, November 1987.

3. P.V. Mockapetris, Domain Names - Implementation and Specification,

RFC1035, November 1987.

4. M.K. Stahl, Domain Administrators Guide, RFC1032, November 1987.

5. M. Lottor, Domain Administrators Operations Guide, RFC1033,

November 1987.

6. W.D. Lazear, MILNET Name Domain Transition, RFC1031,

November 1987.

2. Letter from DISA to the IAB

16 APR 1992

Mr. Lyman Chapin

Chairman, Internet Activities Board

BBN Communications

Division of Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc.

150 Cambridge Park Dr.

Chambridge, MA 02140

Dear Mr. Chapin:

We have received you letter concerning the adoption and use of the

Domain Name System (DNS) throughout the Internet. Since the DoD

makes significant use of the Internet, we are very concerned with

issues such as the DNS that potentially affect both performance and

interoperability. We have agreed to staff this issue to consider all

the technical and economical impacts on DoD systems. We will inform

you of the decisions reached as the result of our reviews as son as

they are completed.

Sincerely,

Kenneth A. Thomas

Colonel, USA

Chairman, Protocol Standards

Steering Group (PSSG)

Copy to:

Mr. Pasquariello, Associate Director, Center for Standards

Mr. Schonborn, Deputy Director/DDN PMO

3. Letter from the IAB to DISA

19 May, 1992

Colonel Kenneth Thomas

Chairman, Protocol Standards Steering Group

Defense Information Systems Agency

Fort Monmouth, NJ 07703-5613

Dear Colonel Thomas,

Thank you for your response to my letter concerning the adoption and

use of the Domain Name System throughout the Internet. I appreciate

your willingness to devote resources to consider this issue, and look

forward to hearing the results of the study.

As LCDR David Chappell has suggested, it would be useful for us to

arrange a meeting to discuss issues of mutual concern to DISA and the

IAB. I do not yet know if it will be feasible for me to arrange to

meet with you in Ft. Monmouth in the near future (my travel schedule

being somewhat oversubscribed), but will get in touch with you soon

to find a suitable date and location.

Regards,

A. Lyman Chapin

Chairman, Internet Activities Board

BBN Communications 20/5b

150 Cambridge Park Drive

Cambridge, MA 02140

Security Considerations

Security issues are not discussed in this memo.

Author's Address

A. Lyman Chapin

BBN Communications Corporation

150 Cambridge Park Drive

Cambridge, MA 02140

Phone: 617-873-3133

Fax: 617-873-4086

Email: Lyman@BBN.COM

 
 
 
免责声明:本文为网络用户发布,其观点仅代表作者个人观点,与本站无关,本站仅提供信息存储服务。文中陈述内容未经本站证实,其真实性、完整性、及时性本站不作任何保证或承诺,请读者仅作参考,并请自行核实相关内容。
2023年上半年GDP全球前十五强
 百态   2023-10-24
美众议院议长启动对拜登的弹劾调查
 百态   2023-09-13
上海、济南、武汉等多地出现不明坠落物
 探索   2023-09-06
印度或要将国名改为“巴拉特”
 百态   2023-09-06
男子为女友送行,买票不登机被捕
 百态   2023-08-20
手机地震预警功能怎么开?
 干货   2023-08-06
女子4年卖2套房花700多万做美容:不但没变美脸,面部还出现变形
 百态   2023-08-04
住户一楼被水淹 还冲来8头猪
 百态   2023-07-31
女子体内爬出大量瓜子状活虫
 百态   2023-07-25
地球连续35年收到神秘规律性信号,网友:不要回答!
 探索   2023-07-21
全球镓价格本周大涨27%
 探索   2023-07-09
钱都流向了那些不缺钱的人,苦都留给了能吃苦的人
 探索   2023-07-02
倩女手游刀客魅者强控制(强混乱强眩晕强睡眠)和对应控制抗性的关系
 百态   2020-08-20
美国5月9日最新疫情:美国确诊人数突破131万
 百态   2020-05-09
荷兰政府宣布将集体辞职
 干货   2020-04-30
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案逍遥观:鹏程万里
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案神机营:射石饮羽
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案昆仑山:拔刀相助
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案天工阁:鬼斧神工
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案丝路古道:单枪匹马
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案镇郊荒野:与虎谋皮
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案镇郊荒野:李代桃僵
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案镇郊荒野:指鹿为马
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案金陵:小鸟依人
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案金陵:千金买邻
 干货   2019-11-12
 
推荐阅读
 
 
 
>>返回首頁<<
 
靜靜地坐在廢墟上,四周的荒凉一望無際,忽然覺得,淒涼也很美
© 2005- 王朝網路 版權所有