⭐ 欢迎来到虫虫下载站! | 📦 资源下载 📁 资源专辑 ℹ️ 关于我们
⭐ 虫虫下载站

📄 rfc3655.txt

📁 bind 9.3结合mysql数据库
💻 TXT
📖 第 1 页 / 共 2 页
字号:
RFC 3655               Redefinition of DNS AD bit          November 2003   is not advisable to trust these recursive nameservers.  A   roaming/traveling host SHOULD not use recursive DNS servers offered   by DHCP when looking up information where security status matters.   In the latter two cases, the end consumer must also completely trust   the path to the trusted recursive name servers, or a secure transport   must be employed to protect the traffic.   When faced with a situation where there are no satisfactory recursive   nameservers available, running one locally is RECOMMENDED.  This has   the advantage that it can be trusted, and the AD bit can still be   used to allow applications to use stub resolvers.5.  Security Considerations   This document redefines a bit in the DNS header.  If a resolver   trusts the value of the AD bit, it must be sure that the responder is   using the updated definition, which is any DNS server/resolver   supporting the DO bit [RFC3225].   Authoritative servers can be explicitly configured to set the AD bit   on answers without doing cryptographic checks.  This behavior MUST be   off by default.  The only affected resolvers are those that directly   query and trust the authoritative server, and this functionality   SHOULD only be used on servers that act both as authoritative and   recursive name servers.   Resolvers (full or stub) that blindly trust the AD bit without   knowing the security policy of the server generating the answer can   not be considered security aware.   A resolver MUST NOT blindly trust the AD bit unless it communicates   such as IPsec, or using message authentication such as TSIG [RFC2845]   or SIG(0) [RFC2931].  In addition, the resolver must have been   explicitly configured to trust this recursive name server.6.  IANA Considerations   None.7.  Internationalization Considerations   None.  This document does not change any textual data in any   protocol.Wellington & Gudmundsson    Standards Track                     [Page 5]RFC 3655               Redefinition of DNS AD bit          November 20038.  Intellectual Property Rights Notice   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any   intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights   might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it   has made any effort to identify any such rights.  Information on the   IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and   standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11.  Copies of   claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of   licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to   obtain a general license or permission for the use of such   proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can   be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary   rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF Executive   Director.9.  Acknowledgments   The following people have provided input on this document: Robert   Elz, Andreas Gustafsson, Bob Halley, Steven Jacob, Erik Nordmark,   Edward Lewis, Jakob Schlyter, Roy Arends, Ted Lindgreen.10.  Normative References   [RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Implementation and             Specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.   [RFC2535] Eastlake, D., "Domain Name System Security Extensions", RFC             2535, March 1999.   [RFC2845] Vixie, P., Gudmundsson, O., Eastlake 3rd, D. and B.             Wellington, "Secret Key Transaction Authentication for DNS             (TSIG)", RFC 2845, May 2000.   [RFC2931] Eastlake, D., "DNS Request and Transaction Signatures             (SIG(0))", RFC 2931, September 2000.   [RFC3225] Conrad, D., "Indicating Resolver Support of DNSSEC", RFC             3225, December 2001.Wellington & Gudmundsson    Standards Track                     [Page 6]RFC 3655               Redefinition of DNS AD bit          November 200311.  Authors' Addresses   Brian Wellington   Nominum Inc.   2385 Bay Road   Redwood City, CA, 94063   USA   EMail: Brian.Wellington@nominum.com   Olafur Gudmundsson   3821 Village Park Drive   Chevy Chase, MD, 20815   USA   EMail: ogud@ogud.comWellington & Gudmundsson    Standards Track                     [Page 7]RFC 3655               Redefinition of DNS AD bit          November 200312.  Full Copyright Statement   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003).  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 assignees.   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.Wellington & Gudmundsson    Standards Track                     [Page 8]

⌨️ 快捷键说明

复制代码 Ctrl + C
搜索代码 Ctrl + F
全屏模式 F11
切换主题 Ctrl + Shift + D
显示快捷键 ?
增大字号 Ctrl + =
减小字号 Ctrl + -