Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                        H. Salgado
Request for Comments: 9660                                     NIC Chile
Category: Standards Track                                     M. Vergara
ISSN: 2070-1721                                             DigitalOcean
                                                             D. Wessels
                                                               Verisign
                                                           October 2024


              The DNS Zone Version (ZONEVERSION) Option

Abstract

  The DNS ZONEVERSION option is a way for DNS clients to request, and
  for authoritative DNS servers to provide, information regarding the
  version of the zone from which a response is generated.  The SERIAL
  field from the Start of Authority (SOA) resource record (RR) is a
  good example of a zone's version, and it is the only one defined by
  this specification.  Additional version types may be defined by
  future specifications.

  Including zone version data in a response simplifies and improves the
  quality of debugging and diagnostics since the version and the DNS
  answer are provided atomically.  This can be especially useful for
  zones and DNS providers that leverage IP anycast or multiple backend
  systems.  It functions similarly to the DNS Name Server Identifier
  (NSID) option described in RFC 5001.

Status of This Memo

  This is an Internet Standards Track document.

  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).  Further information on
  Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.

  Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
  and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
  https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9660.

Copyright Notice

  Copyright (c) 2024 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
  (https://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 Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the
  Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described
  in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

  1.  Introduction
    1.1.  Requirements Language
    1.2.  Terminology
  2.  The ZONEVERSION Option
    2.1.  Wire Format
    2.2.  Presentation Format
  3.  ZONEVERSION Processing
    3.1.  Initiators
    3.2.  Responders
      3.2.1.  Responding to Invalid ZONEVERSION Queries
      3.2.2.  ZONEVERSION Is Not Transitive
  4.  The SOA-SERIAL ZONEVERSION Type
    4.1.  Type SOA-SERIAL Presentation Format
  5.  Example Usage
  6.  IANA Considerations
    6.1.  DNS EDNS(0) Option Code Registration
    6.2.  ZONEVERSION TYPE Values Registry
      6.2.1.  Designated Expert Review Directives
  7.  Security Considerations
  8.  Normative References
  9.  Informative References
  Appendix A.  Implementation Considerations
  Appendix B.  Implementation References
  Acknowledgements
  Authors' Addresses

1.  Introduction

  The ZONEVERSION option allows DNS queriers to request, and
  authoritative DNS servers to provide, a token representing the
  version of the zone from which a DNS response was generated.  It is
  similar to the NSID option [RFC5001], which can be used to convey the
  identification of a name server that generates a response.

  The Domain Name System allows data to be loosely coherent [RFC3254],
  because synchronization can never be instantaneous, and some uses of
  DNS do not require strong coherency anyway.  This means that a record
  obtained by one response could be out of sync with other
  authoritative sources of the same data at the same point in time.
  This can make it difficult to debug some problems when there is a
  need to couple the data with the version of the zone it came from.
  Furthermore, in today's Internet, it is common for high volume and
  important DNS zones to utilize IP anycast (Section 4.9 of [RFC4786])
  and/or load-balanced backend servers.  In general, there is no way to
  ensure that two separate queries are delivered to the same server.
  The ZONEVERSION option both simplifies and improves DNS monitoring
  and debugging by directly associating the data and the version
  together in a single response.

  The SOA SERIAL field (Section 4.3.5 of [RFC1034]) is one example of
  zone versioning.  Its purpose is to facilitate the distribution of
  zone data between primary and secondary name servers.  It is also
  often useful in DNS monitoring and debugging.  This document
  specifies the SOA SERIAL as one type of ZONEVERSION data.

  Some DNS zones may use other distribution and synchronization
  mechanisms that are not based on the SOA SERIAL number, such as
  relational databases or other proprietary methods.  In those cases,
  the SOA SERIAL field may not be relevant with respect to the
  versioning of its content.  To accommodate these use cases, new
  ZONEVERSION types could be defined in future specifications.
  Alternatively, zone operators may use one of the Private Use
  ZONEVERSION code points allocated by this specification.

  The ZONEVERSION option is OPTIONAL to implement by DNS clients and
  name servers.  It is designed for use only when a name server
  provides authoritative response data.  It is intended only for hop-
  to-hop communication and is not transitive.

1.1.  Requirements Language

  The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
  "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
  "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
  BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
  capitals, as shown here.

1.2.  Terminology

  In this document, "original QNAME" is used to mean what the DNS
  terminology document [RFC9499] calls "QNAME (original)":

  |  The name actually sent in the Question section in the original
  |  query, which is always echoed in the (final) reply in the Question
  |  section when the QR bit is set to 1.

  In this document, an "enclosing zone" of a domain name means a zone
  in which the domain name is present as an owner name or any parent of
  that zone.  For example, if B.C.EXAMPLE and EXAMPLE are zones but
  C.EXAMPLE is not, the domain name A.B.C.EXAMPLE has B.C.EXAMPLE,
  EXAMPLE, and the root as enclosing zones.

2.  The ZONEVERSION Option

  This document specifies a new EDNS(0) [RFC6891] option, ZONEVERSION,
  which can be used by DNS clients and servers to provide information
  regarding the version of the zone from which a response is generated.

2.1.  Wire Format

  The ZONEVERSION option is encoded as follows:

  OPTION-CODE for the ZONEVERSION option is 19.

  OPTION-LENGTH for the ZONEVERSION option MUST have a value of 0 for
  queries and MUST have the value of the length (in octets) of the
  OPTION-DATA for responses.

  OPTION-DATA for the ZONEVERSION option is omitted in queries.  For
  responses, it is composed of three fields:

  *  an unsigned 1-octet Label Count (LABELCOUNT) indicating the number
     of labels for the name of the zone that VERSION value refers to

  *  an unsigned 1-octet type number (TYPE) distinguishing the format
     and meaning of VERSION

  *  an opaque octet string conveying the zone version data (VERSION)

                  +0 (MSB)                       +1 (LSB)
     +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
  0: |           LABELCOUNT          |            TYPE               |
     +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
  2: |                            VERSION                            |
     /                                                               /
     +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+

    Figure 1: Diagram with the OPTION-DATA Format for the ZONEVERSION
                                  Option

  The LABELCOUNT field indicates the name of the zone that the
  ZONEVERSION option refers to, by means of taking the last LABELCOUNT
  labels of the original QNAME.  For example, an answer with QNAME
  "a.b.c.example.com" and a ZONEVERSION option with a LABELCOUNT of
  value 2 indicates that the zone name in which this ZONEVERSION refers
  to is "example.com.".

  In the case of a downward referral response, the LABELCOUNT number
  helps to differentiate between the parent and child zones, where the
  parent is authoritative for some portion of the QNAME above a zone
  cut.  Also, if the ANSWER section has more than one RR set with
  different zones (like a CNAME and a target name in another zone), the
  number of labels in the QNAME disambiguates such a situation.

  The value of the LABELCOUNT field MUST NOT count the null (root)
  label that terminates the original QNAME.  The value of the
  LABELCOUNT field MUST be less than or equal to the number of labels
  in the original QNAME.  The Root zone (".") has a LABELCOUNT field
  value of 0.

2.2.  Presentation Format

  The presentation format of the ZONEVERSION option is as follows:

  The OPTION-CODE field MUST be represented as the mnemonic value
  ZONEVERSION.

  The OPTION-LENGTH field MAY be omitted, but if present, it MUST be
  represented as an unsigned decimal integer.

  The LABELCOUNT value of the OPTION-DATA field MAY be omitted, but if
  present, it MUST be represented as an unsigned decimal integer.  The
  corresponding zone name SHOULD be displayed (i.e., LABELCOUNT labels
  of the original QNAME) for easier human consumption.

  The TYPE and VERSION fields of the option SHOULD be represented
  according to each specific TYPE.

3.  ZONEVERSION Processing

3.1.  Initiators

  A DNS client MAY signal its support and desire for zone version
  information by including an empty ZONEVERSION option in the EDNS(0)
  OPT pseudo-RR of a query to an authoritative name server.  An empty
  ZONEVERSION option has OPTION-LENGTH set to zero.

  A DNS client SHOULD NOT send the ZONEVERSION option to non-
  authoritative name servers.

  A DNS client MUST NOT include more than one ZONEVERSION option in the
  OPT pseudo-RR of a DNS query.

3.2.  Responders

  A name server that (a) understands the ZONEVERSION option, (b)
  receives a query with the ZONEVERSION option, (c) is authoritative
  for one or more enclosing zones of the original QNAME, and (d)
  chooses to honor a particular ZONEVERSION request responds by
  including a TYPE and corresponding VERSION value in a ZONEVERSION
  option in an EDNS(0) OPT pseudo-RR in the response message.

  Otherwise, a server MUST NOT include a ZONEVERSION option in the
  response.

  A name server MAY include more than one ZONEVERSION option in the
  response if it supports multiple TYPEs.  A name server MAY also
  include more than one ZONEVERSION option in the response if it is
  authoritative for more than one enclosing zone of the original QNAME.
  A name server MUST NOT include more than one ZONEVERSION option for a
  given TYPE and LABELCOUNT.

  Note: the ZONEVERSION option should be included for any response
  satisfying the criteria above including, but not limited to, the
  following:

  *  Downward referral (see "Referrals" in Section 4 of [RFC9499]),
     even though the response's Authoritative Answer bit is not set.
     In this case, the ZONEVERSION data MUST correspond to the version
     of the referring zone.

  *  Name error (NXDOMAIN), even though the response does not include
     any Answer section RRs.

  *  NODATA (Section 3 of [RFC9499]), even though the response does not
     include any Answer section RRs.

  *  Server failure (SERVFAIL) when the server is authoritative for the
     original QNAME.

3.2.1.  Responding to Invalid ZONEVERSION Queries

  A name server that understands the ZONEVERSION option MUST return a
  FORMERR response when:

  *  The ZONEVERSION OPTION-LENGTH is not zero.

  *  More than one ZONEVERSION option is present.

3.2.2.  ZONEVERSION Is Not Transitive

  The ZONEVERSION option is not transitive.  A name server (recursive
  or otherwise) MUST NOT blindly copy the ZONEVERSION option from a
  query it receives into a subsequent query that it sends onward to
  another server.  A name server MUST NOT send a ZONEVERSION option
  back to a client that did not request it.

4.  The SOA-SERIAL ZONEVERSION Type

  The first and only ZONEVERSION option TYPE defined in this document
  is a zone's serial number as found in the Start of Authority (SOA)
  RR.

  As mentioned previously, some DNS zones may use alternative
  distribution and synchronization mechanisms that are not based on the
  SOA SERIAL number, and the SERIAL field may not be relevant with
  respect to the versioning of zone content.  In those cases, a name
  server SHOULD NOT include a ZONEVERSION option with type SOA-SERIAL
  in a reply.

  The value for this type is "0".

  The mnemonic for this type is "SOA-SERIAL".

  The EDNS(0) OPTION-LENGTH for this type MUST be set to "6" in
  responses.

  The VERSION value for the SOA-SERIAL type MUST be a copy of the
  unsigned 32-bit SERIAL field of the SOA RR, as defined in
  Section 3.3.13 of [RFC1035].

4.1.  Type SOA-SERIAL Presentation Format

  The presentation format of this type content is as follows:

     The TYPE field MUST be represented as the mnemonic value "SOA-
     SERIAL".

     The VERSION field MUST be represented as an unsigned decimal
     integer.

5.  Example Usage

  A name server that (a) implements this specification, (b) receives a
  query with the ZONEVERSION option, (c) is authoritative for the zone
  of the original QNAME, and (d) utilizes the SOA SERIAL field for
  versioning of said zone should include a ZONEVERSION option in its
  response.  In the response's ZONEVERSION option, the EDNS(0) OPTION-
  LENGTH would be set to 6 and the OPTION-DATA would consist of the
  1-octet LABELCOUNT, the 1-octet TYPE with value 0, and the 4-octet
  SOA-SERIAL value.

  The example below demonstrates expected output of a diagnostic tool
  that implements the ZONEVERSION option, displaying a response from a
  compliant authoritative DNS server:

    $ dig @ns.example.com www.example.com aaaa +zoneversion \
    +norecurse +nocmd

    ;; Got answer:
    ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 7077
    ;; flags: qr aa; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 2

    ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
    ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 1232
    ; ZONEVERSION: 02 00 78 95 a4 e9 ("SOA-SERIAL: 2023073001 \
    ; (example.com.)")
    ;; QUESTION SECTION:
    ;www.example.com.    IN  AAAA

    ;; ANSWER SECTION:
    www.example.com.  43200  IN  AAAA  2001:db8::80

    ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
    example.com.    43200  IN  NS  ns.example.com.

    ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
    ns.example.com.    43200  IN  AAAA  2001:db8::53

    ;; Query time: 15 msec
    ;; SERVER: 2001:db8::53#53(2001:db8::53) (UDP)
    ;; WHEN: dom jul 30 19:51:04 -04 2023
    ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 129

                  Figure 2: Example Usage and Dig Output

6.  IANA Considerations

6.1.  DNS EDNS(0) Option Code Registration

  This document defines a new EDNS(0) option, entitled "ZONEVERSION"
  (see Section 2), with the assigned value of 19 from the "DNS EDNS0
  Option Codes (OPT)" registry:

             +=======+=============+==========+===========+
             | Value | Name        | Status   | Reference |
             +=======+=============+==========+===========+
             | 19    | ZONEVERSION | Standard | RFC 9660  |
             +=======+=============+==========+===========+

             Table 1: DNS EDNS0 Option Codes (OPT) Registry

6.2.  ZONEVERSION TYPE Values Registry

  IANA has created and will maintain a new registry called "ZONEVERSION
  TYPE Values" in the "Domain Name System (DNS) Parameters" registry
  group as follows:

                  +=========+=========================+
                  | Range   | Registration Procedures |
                  +=========+=========================+
                  | 0-245   | Specification Required  |
                  +=========+=========================+
                  | 246-254 | Private Use             |
                  +=========+=========================+
                  | 255     | Reserved                |
                  +=========+=========================+

                     Table 2: Registration Procedures
                     for the ZONEVERSION TYPE Values
                                 Registry

  Initial values for the "ZONEVERSION TYPE Values" registry are given
  below; future assignments in the 1-245 values range are to be made
  through Specification Required [RFC8126].  Assignments consist of a
  TYPE value as an unsigned 8-bit integer recorded in decimal, a
  Mnemonic name as an uppercase ASCII string with a maximum length of
  15 characters, and the required document reference.

       +==================+==========================+===========+
       | ZONEVERSION TYPE | Mnemonic                 | Reference |
       +==================+==========================+===========+
       | 0                | SOA-SERIAL               | RFC 9660  |
       +==================+==========================+===========+
       | 1-245            | Unassigned               |           |
       +==================+==========================+===========+
       | 246-254          | Reserved for Private Use | RFC 9660  |
       +==================+==========================+===========+
       | 255              | Reserved                 | RFC 9660  |
       +==================+==========================+===========+

                Table 3: ZONEVERSION TYPE Values Registry

  The change controller for this registry is IETF.

6.2.1.  Designated Expert Review Directives

  The allocation procedure for new code points in the "ZONEVERSION TYPE
  Values" registry is Specification Required, thus review is required
  by a designated expert as stated in [RFC8126].

  When evaluating requests, the expert should consider the following:

  *  Duplication of code point allocations should be avoided.

  *  A Presentation Format section should be provided with a clear code
     point mnemonic.

  *  The referenced document and stated use of the new code point
     should be appropriate for the intended use of a ZONEVERSION TYPE
     assignment.  In particular, the reference should state clear
     instructions for implementers about the syntax and semantic of the
     data.  Also, the length of the data must have proper limits.

  The expert reviewing the request MUST respond within 10 business
  days.

7.  Security Considerations

  The EDNS extension data is not covered by RRSIG records, so there's
  no way to verify its authenticity nor integrity using DNSSEC, and it
  could theoretically be tampered with by a person in the middle if the
  transport is made by insecure means.  Caution should be taken to use
  the EDNS ZONEVERSION data for any means besides troubleshooting and
  debugging.

  If there's a need to certify the trustworthiness of ZONEVERSION, it
  will be necessary to use an encrypted and authenticated DNS
  transport, a transaction signature (TSIG) [RFC8945], or SIG(0)
  [RFC2931].

  If there's a need to authenticate the data origin for the ZONEVERSION
  value, an answer with the SOA-SERIAL type as defined above could be
  compared to a separate regular SOA query with a DO flag, whose answer
  shall be DNSSEC signed.  Since these are separate queries, the
  caveats about loose coherency already stated in the Introduction
  (Section 1) would apply.

  With the SOA-SERIAL type defined above, there's no risk on disclosure
  of private information, as the SERIAL of the SOA record is already
  publicly available.

  Please note that the ZONEVERSION option cannot be used for checking
  the correctness of an entire zone in a server.  For such cases, the
  ZONEMD record [RFC8976] might be better suited for such a task.
  ZONEVERSION can help identify and correlate a specific answer with a
  version of a zone, but it has no special integrity or verification
  function besides a normal field value inside a zone, as stated above.

8.  Normative References

  [RFC1034]  Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities",
             STD 13, RFC 1034, DOI 10.17487/RFC1034, November 1987,
             <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1034>.

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

  [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
             DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
             <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

  [RFC6891]  Damas, J., Graff, M., and P. Vixie, "Extension Mechanisms
             for DNS (EDNS(0))", STD 75, RFC 6891,
             DOI 10.17487/RFC6891, April 2013,
             <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6891>.

  [RFC8126]  Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
             Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
             RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
             <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.

  [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
             2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
             May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

9.  Informative References

  [ImplRef]  "Zoneversion Implementations", commit f5f68a0, August
             2023, <https://github.com/huguei/rrserial>.

  [RFC2931]  Eastlake 3rd, D., "DNS Request and Transaction Signatures
             ( SIG(0)s )", RFC 2931, DOI 10.17487/RFC2931, September
             2000, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2931>.

  [RFC3254]  Alvestrand, H., "Definitions for talking about
             directories", RFC 3254, DOI 10.17487/RFC3254, April 2002,
             <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3254>.

  [RFC4786]  Abley, J. and K. Lindqvist, "Operation of Anycast
             Services", BCP 126, RFC 4786, DOI 10.17487/RFC4786,
             December 2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4786>.

  [RFC5001]  Austein, R., "DNS Name Server Identifier (NSID) Option",
             RFC 5001, DOI 10.17487/RFC5001, August 2007,
             <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5001>.

  [RFC8945]  Dupont, F., Morris, S., Vixie, P., Eastlake 3rd, D.,
             Gudmundsson, O., and B. Wellington, "Secret Key
             Transaction Authentication for DNS (TSIG)", STD 93,
             RFC 8945, DOI 10.17487/RFC8945, November 2020,
             <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8945>.

  [RFC8976]  Wessels, D., Barber, P., Weinberg, M., Kumari, W., and W.
             Hardaker, "Message Digest for DNS Zones", RFC 8976,
             DOI 10.17487/RFC8976, February 2021,
             <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8976>.

  [RFC9499]  Hoffman, P. and K. Fujiwara, "DNS Terminology", BCP 219,
             RFC 9499, DOI 10.17487/RFC9499, March 2024,
             <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9499>.

Appendix A.  Implementation Considerations

  With very few exceptions, EDNS(0) option values in a response are
  independent of the queried name.  This is not the case for
  ZONEVERSION, so its implementation may be more or less difficult,
  depending on how EDNS(0) options are handled in the name server.

Appendix B.  Implementation References

  There is a patched NSD server (version 4.7.0) with support for
  ZONEVERSION as well as live test servers installed for compliance
  tests.  Also, there is a client command "dig" with added zoneversion
  support, along with test libraries in Perl, Python, and Go.  See
  [ImplRef] for more information.

Acknowledgements

  The authors are thankful for all the support and comments made in the
  DNSOP Working Group mailing list, chats, and discussions.  A special
  thanks for suggestions to generalize the option using a registry of
  types from Petr Špaček and Florian Obser, suggestions for
  implementation from Stéphane Bortzmeyer, clarifications on security
  from George Michaelson, zone name disambiguation from Joe Abley and
  Brian Dickson, and reviews from Tim Wicinski and Peter Thomassen.

Authors' Addresses

  Hugo Salgado
  NIC Chile
  Miraflores 222, piso 14
  CP 8320198 Santiago
  Chile
  Phone: +56 2 29407700
  Email: [email protected]


  Mauricio Vergara Ereche
  DigitalOcean
  101 6th Ave
  New York, NY 10013
  United States of America
  Email: [email protected]


  Duane Wessels
  Verisign
  12061 Bluemont Way
  Reston, VA 20190
  United States of America
  Phone: +1 703 948-3200
  Email: [email protected]
  URI:   https://verisign.com