⭐ 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

📄 draft-ietf-dnsop-misbehavior-against-aaaa-00.txt

📁 bind 9.3结合mysql数据库
💻 TXT
📖 第 1 页 / 共 2 页
字号:
IETF DNSOP Working Group                                    Y. MorishitaInternet-Draft                                                      JPRSExpires: July 11, 2004                                         T. Jinmei                                                                 Toshiba                                                        January 11, 2004       Common Misbehavior against DNS Queries for IPv6 Addresses            draft-ietf-dnsop-misbehavior-against-aaaa-00.txtStatus of this Memo   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other   groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any   time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://   www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.   This Internet-Draft will expire on July 11, 2004.Copyright Notice   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.Abstract   There is some known misbehavior of DNS authoritative servers when   they are queried for AAAA resource records. Such behavior can block   IPv4 communication which should actually be available, cause a   significant delay in name resolution, or even make a denial of   service attack. This memo describes details of the known cases and   discusses the effect of the cases.1. Introduction   Many DNS clients (resolvers) that support IPv6 first search for AAAA   Resource Records (RRs) of a target host name, and then for A RRs ofMorishita & Jinmei       Expires July 11, 2004                  [Page 1]Internet-Draft    Common Misbehavior against AAAA Queries   January 2004   the same name. This fallback mechanism is based on the DNS   specifications, which if not obeyed by authoritative servers can   produce unpleasant results. In some cases, for example, a web browser   fails to connect to a web server it could otherwise. In the following   sections, this memo describes some typical cases of the misbehavior   and its (bad) effects.   Note that the misbehavior is not specific to AAAA RRs. In fact, all   known examples also apply to the cases of queries for MX, NS, and SOA   RRs. The authors even believe this can be generalized for all types   of queries other than those for A RRs. In this memo, however, we   concentrate on the case for AAAA queries, since the problem is   particularly severe for resolvers that support IPv6, which thus   affects many end users. Resolvers at end users normally send A and/or   AAAA queries only, and so the problem for the other cases is   relatively minor.2. Network Model   In this memo, we assume a typical network model of name resolution   environment using DNS. It consists of three components; stub   resolvers, caching servers, and authoritative servers. A stub   resolver issues a recursive query to a caching server, which then   handles the entire name resolution procedure recursively. The caching   server caches the result of the query as well as sends the result to   the stub resolver. The authoritative servers respond to queries for   names for which they have the authority, normally in a non-recursive   manner.3. Expected Behavior   Suppose that an authoritative server has an A RR but not a AAAA RR   for a host name. Then the server should return a response to a query   for a AAAA RR of the name with the RCODE being 0 (indicating no   error) and with an empty answer section [1]. Such a response   indicates that there is at least one RR of a different type than AAAA   for the queried name, and the stub resolver can then look for A RRs.   This way, the caching server can cache the fact that the queried name   does not have a AAAA RR (but may have other types of RRs), and thus   can improve the response time to further queries for a AAAA RR of the   name.4. Problematic Behaviors   There are some known cases at authoritative servers that do not   conform to the expected behavior. This section describes those   problematic cases.Morishita & Jinmei       Expires July 11, 2004                  [Page 2]Internet-Draft    Common Misbehavior against AAAA Queries   January 20044.1 Return NXDOMAIN   This type of server returns a response with the RCODE being 3   (NXDOMAIN) to a query for a AAAA RR, indicating it does not have any   RRs of any type for the queried name.   With this response, the stub resolver may immediately give up and   never fall back. Even if the resolver retries with a query for an A   RR, the negative response for the name has been cached in the caching   server, and the caching server will simply return the negative   response. As a result, the stub resolver considers this as a fatal   error in name resolution.   There have been several known examples of this behavior, but all the   examples that the authors know have changed their behavior as of this   writing.4.2 Return NOTIMP   Other authoritative servers return a response with the RCODE being 4   (NOTIMP), indicating the servers do not support the requested type of   query.   This case is less harmful than the previous one; if the stub resolver   falls back to querying for an A RR, the caching server will process   the query correctly and return an appropriate response.   In this case, the caching server does not cache the fact that the   queried name has no AAAA RR, resulting in redundant queries for AAAA   RRs in the future. The behavior will waste network bandwidth and   increase the load of the authoritative server.   Using SERVFAIL or FORMERR would cause the same effect, though the   authors have not seen such implementations yet.4.3 Return a Broken Response   Another different type of authoritative servers returns broken   responses to AAAA queries. A known behavior of this category is to   return a response whose RR type is AAAA, but the length of the RDATA   is 4 bytes. The 4-byte data looks like the IPv4 address of the   queried host name. That is, the RR in the answer section would be   described like this:     www.bad.example. 600 IN AAAA 192.0.2.1   which is, of course, bogus (or at least meaningless).Morishita & Jinmei       Expires July 11, 2004                  [Page 3]Internet-Draft    Common Misbehavior against AAAA Queries   January 2004   A widely deployed caching server implementation transparently returns   the broken response (as well as caches it) to the stub resolver.   Another known server implementation parses the response by   themselves, and sends a separate response with the RCODE being 2   (SERVFAIL).   In either case, the broken response does not affect queries for an A   RR of the same name. If the stub resolver falls back to A queries, it   will get an appropriate response.   The latter case, however, causes the same bad effect as that   described in the previous section: redundant queries for AAAA RRs.4.4 Make Lame Delegation   Some authoritative servers respond to AAAA queries in a way causing   lame delegation. In this case the parent zone specifies that the   authoritative server should have the authority of a zone, but the   server does not return an authoritative response for AAAA queries   within the zone (i.e., the AA bit in the response is not set). On the   other hand, the authoritative server returns an authoritative   response for A queries.   When a caching server asks the server for AAAA RRs in the zone, it   recognizes the delegation is lame, and return a response with the   RCODE being 2 (SERVFAIL) to the stub resolver.   Furthermore, some caching servers record the authoritative server as   lame for the zone and will not use it for a certain period of time.   With this type of caching server, even if the stub resolver falls   back to querying for an A RR, the caching server will simply return a   response with the RCODE being SERVFAIL, since all the servers are   known to be "lame."   There is also an implementation that relaxes the behavior a little   bit. It basically tries to avoid using the lame server, but still   continues to try it as a last resort. With this type of caching   server, the stub resolver will get a correct response if it falls   back after SERVFAIL. However, this still causes redundant AAAA   queries as explained in the previous sections.4.5 Ignore Queries for AAAA   Some authoritative severs seem to ignore queries for a AAAA RR,   causing a delay at the stub resolver to fall back to a query for an A   RR. This behavior may even cause a fatal timeout at the resolver.Morishita & Jinmei       Expires July 11, 2004                  [Page 4]Internet-Draft    Common Misbehavior against AAAA Queries   January 20045. Security Considerations   The CERT/CC pointed out that the response with NXDOMAIN described in   Section 4.1 can be used for a denial of service attack [2]. The same   argument applies to the case of "lame delegation" described in   Section 4.4 with a certain type of caching server.6. Acknowledgements   Erik Nordmark encouraged the authors to publish this document as an   Internet Draft. Akira Kato and Paul Vixie reviewed a preliminary   version of this document. Pekka Savola carefully reviewed a previous   version and provided detailed comments.Informative References   [1]  Mockapetris, P., "DOMAIN NAMES - CONCEPTS AND FACILITIES", RFC        1034, November 1987.   [2]  The CERT Coordination Center, "Incorrect NXDOMAIN responses from        AAAA queries could cause denial-of-service conditions", March        2003, <http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/714121>.Authors' Addresses

⌨️ 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 + -