| Rfc | 1995 |
|---|
| Title | Incremental Zone Transfer in DNS |
|---|
| Author | M. Ohta |
|---|
| Date | August 1996 |
|---|
| Format: | TXT, HTML |
|---|
| Updates | RFC1035 |
|---|
| Updated by | RFC9103 |
|---|
| Status: | PROPOSED
STANDARD |
|---|
|
Network Working Group M. Ohta
Request for Comments: 1995 Tokyo Institute of Technology
Updates: 1035 August 1996
Category: Standards Track
Incremental Zone Transfer in 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.
Abstract
This document proposes extensions to the DNS protocols to provide an
incremental zone transfer (IXFR) mechanism.
1. Introduction
For rapid propagation of changes to a DNS database [STD13], it is
necessary to reduce latency by actively notifying servers of the
change. This is accomplished by the NOTIFY extension of the DNS
[NOTIFY].
The current full zone transfer mechanism (AXFR) is not an efficient
means to propagate changes to a small part of a zone, as it transfers
the entire zone file.
Incremental transfer (IXFR) as proposed is a more efficient
mechanism, as it transfers only the changed portion(s) of a zone.
In this document, a secondary name server which requests IXFR is
called an IXFR client and a primary or secondary name server which
responds to the request is called an IXFR server.
2. Brief Description of the Protocol
If an IXFR client, which likely has an older version of a zone,
thinks it needs new information about the zone (typically through SOA
refresh timeout or the NOTIFY mechanism), it sends an IXFR message
containing the SOA serial number of its, presumably outdated, copy of
the zone.
An IXFR server should keep record of the newest version of the zone
and the differences between that copy and several older versions.
When an IXFR request with an older version number is received, the
IXFR server needs to send only the differences required to make that
version current. Alternatively, the server may choose to transfer
the entire zone just as in a normal full zone transfer.
When a zone has been updated, it should be saved in stable storage
before the new version is used to respond to IXFR (or AXFR) queries.
Otherwise, if the server crashes, data which is no longer available
may have been distributed to secondary servers, which can cause
persistent database inconsistencies.
If an IXFR query with the same or newer version number than that of
the server is received, it is replied to with a single SOA record of
the server's current version, just as in AXFR.
Transport of a query may be by either UDP or TCP. If an IXFR query
is via UDP, the IXFR server may attempt to reply using UDP if the
entire response can be contained in a single DNS packet. If the UDP
reply does not fit, the query is responded to with a single SOA
record of the server's current version to inform the client that a
TCP query should be initiated.
Thus, a client should first make an IXFR query using UDP. If the
query type is not recognized by the server, an AXFR (preceded by a
UDP SOA query) should be tried, ensuring backward compatibility. If
the query response is a single packet with the entire new zone, or if
the server does not have a newer version than the client, everything
is done. Otherwise, a TCP IXFR query should be tried.
To ensure integrity, servers should use UDP checksums for all UDP
responses. A cautious client which receives a UDP packet with a
checksum value of zero should ignore the result and try a TCP IXFR
instead.
The query type value of IXFR assigned by IANA is 251.
3. Query Format
The IXFR query packet format is the same as that of a normal DNS
query, but with the query type being IXFR and the authority section
containing the SOA record of client's version of the zone.
4. Response Format
If incremental zone transfer is not available, the entire zone is
returned. The first and the last RR of the response is the SOA
record of the zone. I.e. the behavior is the same as an AXFR
response except the query type is IXFR.
If incremental zone transfer is available, one or more difference
sequences is returned. The list of difference sequences is preceded
and followed by a copy of the server's current version of the SOA.
Each difference sequence represents one update to the zone (one SOA
serial change) consisting of deleted RRs and added RRs. The first RR
of the deleted RRs is the older SOA RR and the first RR of the added
RRs is the newer SOA RR.
Modification of an RR is performed first by removing the original RR
and then adding the modified one.
The sequences of differential information are ordered oldest first
newest last. Thus, the differential sequences are the history of
changes made since the version known by the IXFR client up to the
server's current version.
RRs in the incremental transfer messages may be partial. That is, if
a single RR of multiple RRs of the same RR type changes, only the
changed RR is transferred.
An IXFR client, should only replace an older version with a newer
version after all the differences have been successfully processed.
An incremental response is different from that of a non-incremental
response in that it begins with two SOA RRs, the server's current SOA
followed by the SOA of the client's version which is about to be
replaced.
5. Purging Strategy
An IXFR server can not be required to hold all previous versions
forever and may delete them anytime. In general, there is a trade-off
between the size of storage space and the possibility of using IXFR.
Information about older versions should be purged if the total length
of an IXFR response would be longer than that of an AXFR response.
Given that the purpose of IXFR is to reduce AXFR overhead, this
strategy is quite reasonable. The strategy assures that the amount
of storage required is at most twice that of the current zone
information.
Information older than the SOA expire period may also be purged.
6. Optional Condensation of Multiple Versions
An IXFR server may optionally condense multiple difference sequences
into a single difference sequence, thus, dropping information on
intermediate versions.
This may be beneficial if a lot of versions, not all of which are
useful, are generated. For example, if multiple ftp servers share a
single DNS name and the IP address associated with the name is
changed once a minute to balance load between the ftp servers, it is
not so important to keep track of all the history of changes.
But, this feature may not be so useful if an IXFR client has access
to two IXFR servers: A and B, with inconsistent condensation results.
The current version of the IXFR client, received from server A, may
be unknown to server B. In such a case, server B can not provide
incremental data from the unknown version and a full zone transfer is
necessary.
Condensation is completely optional. Clients can't detect from the
response whether the server has condensed the reply or not.
For interoperability, IXFR servers, including those without the
condensation feature, should not flag an error even if it receives a
client's IXFR request with a unknown version number and should,
instead, attempt to perform a full zone transfer.
7. Example
Given the following three generations of data with the current serial
number of 3,
JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA NS.JAIN.AD.JP. mohta.jain.ad.jp. (
1 600 600 3600000 604800)
IN NS NS.JAIN.AD.JP.
NS.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 133.69.136.1
NEZU.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 133.69.136.5
NEZU.JAIN.AD.JP. is removed and JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. is added.
jain.ad.jp. IN SOA ns.jain.ad.jp. mohta.jain.ad.jp. (
2 600 600 3600000 604800)
IN NS NS.JAIN.AD.JP.
NS.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 133.69.136.1
JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 133.69.136.4
IN A 192.41.197.2
One of the IP addresses of JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. is changed.
JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA ns.jain.ad.jp. mohta.jain.ad.jp. (
3 600 600 3600000 604800)
IN NS NS.JAIN.AD.JP.
NS.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 133.69.136.1
JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 133.69.136.3
IN A 192.41.197.2
The following IXFR query
+---------------------------------------------------+
Header | OPCODE=SQUERY |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Question | QNAME=JAIN.AD.JP., QCLASS=IN, QTYPE=IXFR |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Answer | <empty> |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Authority | JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA serial=1 |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Additional | <empty> |
+---------------------------------------------------+
could be replied to with the following full zone transfer message:
+---------------------------------------------------+
Header | OPCODE=SQUERY, RESPONSE |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Question | QNAME=JAIN.AD.JP., QCLASS=IN, QTYPE=IXFR |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Answer | JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA serial=3 |
| JAIN.AD.JP. IN NS NS.JAIN.AD.JP. |
| NS.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 133.69.136.1 |
| JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 133.69.136.3 |
| JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 192.41.197.2 |
| JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA serial=3 |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Authority | <empty> |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Additional | <empty> |
+---------------------------------------------------+
or with the following incremental message:
+---------------------------------------------------+
Header | OPCODE=SQUERY, RESPONSE |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Question | QNAME=JAIN.AD.JP., QCLASS=IN, QTYPE=IXFR |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Answer | JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA serial=3 |
| JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA serial=1 |
| NEZU.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 133.69.136.5 |
| JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA serial=2 |
| JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 133.69.136.4 |
| JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 192.41.197.2 |
| JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA serial=2 |
| JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 133.69.136.4 |
| JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA serial=3 |
| JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 133.69.136.3 |
| JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA serial=3 |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Authority | <empty> |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Additional | <empty> |
+---------------------------------------------------+
or with the following condensed incremental message:
+---------------------------------------------------+
Header | OPCODE=SQUERY, RESPONSE |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Question | QNAME=JAIN.AD.JP., QCLASS=IN, QTYPE=IXFR |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Answer | JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA serial=3 |
| JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA serial=1 |
| NEZU.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 133.69.136.5 |
| JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA serial=3 |
| JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 133.69.136.3 |
| JAIN-BB.JAIN.AD.JP. IN A 192.41.197.2 |
| JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA serial=3 |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Authority | <empty> |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Additional | <empty> |
+---------------------------------------------------+
or, if UDP packet overflow occurs, with the following message:
+---------------------------------------------------+
Header | OPCODE=SQUERY, RESPONSE |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Question | QNAME=JAIN.AD.JP., QCLASS=IN, QTYPE=IXFR |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Answer | JAIN.AD.JP. IN SOA serial=3 |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Authority | <empty> |
+---------------------------------------------------+
Additional | <empty> |
+---------------------------------------------------+
8. Acknowledgements
The original idea of IXFR was conceived by Anant Kumar, Steve Hotz
and Jon Postel.
For the refinement of the protocol and documentation, many people
have contributed including, but not limited to, Anant Kumar, Robert
Austein, Paul Vixie, Randy Bush, Mark Andrews, Robert Elz and the
members of the IETF DNSIND working group.
9. References
[NOTIFY] Vixie, P., "DNS NOTIFY: A Mechanism for Prompt
Notification of Zone Changes", RFC 1996, August 1996.
[STD13] Mockapetris, P., "Domain Name System", STD 13, RFC 1034 and
RFC 1035), November 1987.
10. Security Considerations
Though DNS is related to several security problems, no attempt is
made to fix them in this document.
This document is believed to introduce no additional security
problems to the current DNS protocol.
11. Author's Address
Masataka Ohta
Computer Center
Tokyo Institute of Technology
2-12-1, O-okayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 152, JAPAN
Phone: +81-3-5734-3299
Fax: +81-3-5734-3415
EMail: mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp