RFC 1031 UNKNOWN DNS · MIGRATION
MILNET name domain transition
The plan for moving MILNET hosts from a central host table to domain-style names.
RFC EDITOR
Lazear, W.D., "MILNET name domain transition", RFC 1031, DOI 10.17487/RFC1031, November 1987, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1031>.
BIBTEX
@misc{rfc1031,
series = {Request for Comments},
number = 1031,
howpublished = {RFC 1031},
publisher = {RFC Editor},
doi = {10.17487/RFC1031},
url = {https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1031},
author = {W.D. Lazear},
title = {{MILNET name domain transition}},
pagetotal = 10,
year = 1987,
month = nov,
} RFC text
Contents
Networking Working Group W. Lazear
Request for Comments: 1031 MITRE
November 1987
MILNET NAME DOMAIN TRANSITION
STATUS OF THIS MEMO
This RFC consolidates information necessary for the implementation of
domain style names throughout the DDN/MILNET Internet community.
Although no official policy has been published, the introduction of
domain style names will impact all hosts in the DDN/MILNET Internet.
The RFC is designed as an aid to implementors and administrators by
providing 1) an overview of the transition process from host tables
to domains, 2) a potential timetable for the transition, and 3)
references to documentation and software relating to the DDN/ARPANET
domain system. Distribution of this RFC is unlimited.
BACKGROUND
All MILNET hosts are expected to have a way of translating the name
of any other host into its Internet address. Although the current
method of name resolution is to look up the information in a table of
all hosts, this method of operation is cumbersome and relies on a
central point of information. The Network Information Center (NIC)
maintains a table of hosts registered in the MILNET Internet and
their addresses. The size of this table and the frequency of updates
has reached the limits of manageability. The central host table is
FTP'd by a host on a timely basis from the NIC, processed locally (to
pare or reformat the table), and used in name resolution.
The domain system uses a distributed database and software to perform
the same functions as the host table. In this system, host resolvers
query domain servers for name resolution. They may cache answers for
performance improvement. The domain servers each maintain a portion
of the hierarchical database under separate administrative authority
and control. Redundancy is obtained by transferring data between
cooperating servers.
The domain system has been operating successfully on the ARPANET for
over a year. One indication of success is that the NIC's central
host table is no longer a complete list (i.e., ARPANET does not
depend primarily on the host table). The domain system is being
implemented on the MILNET with DoD military standard protocols. The
first step in changing to the domain system has been taken, as
required by DDN Management Bulletin #32 (22 Jan 1987). All host
names were converted from a simple, flat namespace to a structured
name consistent with domains. In the second step, servers acting as
the root of the database hierarchy were put in place. In the next
step, hosts are moving away from host table usage.
MIGRATION PATH
All hosts will not change from host table to domain server usage at
one time. Accordingly, three stages of conversion to the domain
system are envisaged. These stages roughly correspond to 1)
continuing to use the host table for all applications, 2) using the
domain system for only some applications, and 3) using the domain
system for all applications. These stages will exist simultaneously
as various hosts convert their application software according to
available resources. The following paragraphs discuss these stages
in more detail.
Host Table Only
In the first stage, a host depends entirely on the host table for
name resolution. The table is obtained from the NIC's central
copy and the resolution is done by local table scanning. Most
hosts are in this stage.
Certain hosts may find it infeasible ever to convert to the domain
system, owing to older architectures, unchangeable software, or
other considerations. At the end of the conversion period, the
NIC will stop maintaining an internet host table. To continue
operations, hosts that do not convert will need to obtain an
equivalent of the host table from some source. This source may be
another host with which a bilateral agreement has been negotiated
offline, a community-of-interest host acting as central repository
for that community, or a locally-maintained table of host names
and addresses. Transfer of the table from the source is a matter
of local implementation and bilateral agreements.
Domain System and Host Table
In the second stage, a host will use both the host table and the
domain system. A likely scenario is that applications like TELNET
and FTP will use the domain system and that MAIL will continue to
use the host table for name resolution. An alternate scenario is
that batchstyle applications like MAIL would use the domain system
and that the interactive applications would convert later.
This stage is viewed as transitory, as hosts convert over to use
the domain system exclusively. It is highlighted as a separate
stage to emphasize the need during transition for both the host
table and the domain system.
Domain System Only
In the third and final stage, a host will have completed
conversion and will be using the domain system exclusively. This
includes correct processing of the mailbox and mail exchanger
resource records.
MIGRATION TIMETABLE
Table 1 shows the events and dates involved in the MILNET transition
from host table to domain system. The operational testing of the
root server software has been completed. Voluntary conversion can
begin immediately, with mandatory conversion required by October
1989. After this date, hosts not converted need to obtain the host
table equivalent by private arrangement (see "Migration Path" above).
Start End
Milestone Date Date
=========================================== ====== ======
Root server operational testing Dec 86 Jul 87
Policy announced in DDN Management Bulletin Oct 87
Host conversion Oct 87 Oct 89
Host table discontinued Oct 89
MILNET Name Domain Timetable
Table 1
DOCUMENTATION
The Name Domain system is described in several documents that are
maintained and available from the NIC in both online and in hardcopy
form. The documents are in "Request For Comments" format (RFC)
commonly used in the Internet to document and discuss various
networking issues. The documents noted in Table 2 fully describe the
concepts, conventions, enhancements, requirements, and operation of
the Name Domain system. The following paragraphs give a brief
synopsis of each document.
RFC PH DOCUMENT TITLE
=== == =======================================================
799 * Internet Name Domains
819 Domain Naming Convention for Internet User Applications
920 Domain Requirements
921 Domain Name System Implementation Schedule - Revised
952 * Internet Host Table Specification
953 * Hostnames Server
974 Mail Routing and the Domain System
1032 Domain Administrators Guide
1033 Domain Administration Operations Guide
1034 Domain Names - Concepts and Facilities
1035 Domain Names - Implementation Specification
* Included in the DDN Protocol Handbook
Name Domain Documents
Table 2
RFC-799
This RFC is an early description of the concepts of a name domain
system. It is exploratory in nature and offers scenarios for name
resolution and mail forwarding.
RFC-819
This RFC is a think peice about hierarchical naming conventions
for internetworking applications. The conventions proposed are
aligned along administrative rather than topological boundaries
and is designed for interoperation among heterogeneous naming
environments. Further topics of discussion include mail relaying,
name service approaches, and naming authorities.
RFC-920
This RFC contains a policy statement on the requirements of
establishing a new domain in the ARPA Internet and introduces the
limited set of top level domains.
RFC-921
This RFC contains a policy statement on the implementation
schedule of the ARPA Internet domain system (as of October 1984).
The discussion describes schedule and future operational
scenarios, as well as the transition between the two.
RFC-952
This RFC specifies the format of the host/address table maintained
by the NIC.
RFC-953
This RFC contains the official specification of the Hostname
Server Protocol. This TCP-based protocol accesses machine-
readable name/address information in the format described by RFC-
952 and is used by hosts to obtain all or a portion of the
centralized host table.
RFC-974
This RFC presents a description of how mail systems are expected
to route messages based on domain system information. In
particular, it discusses how mailers should interpret mail
exchanger resource records for message routing to both host and
domain names.
RFC-1032
This RFC describes the guidelines for a domain administrator to
follow to establish a new domain.
RFC-1033
This RFC provides procedures for domain administrators in
operating a domain server and maintaining their portion of the
hierarchical database.
RFC-1034
This RFC introduces domain style names, their use for ARPA
Internet mail and host address support, and the protocols and
servers used to implement domains. The concepts and facilities of
the domain system are described. The RFC also discusses the
hierarchical database model, resource record usage, query
formation, query resolution, and domain control.
RFC-1035
This RFC specifies the format of domain system transactions,
discusses the implementation of domain servers, and explores the
use of domain names in the context of mail and other network
software.
IMPLEMENTATIONS
Several implementations of the domain system exist. The first two
paragraphs (JEEVES and BIND) discuss the prominent (and most mature)
two implementations and their authors/maintainers. These
implementations are available online. The last paragraphs list
implementations under development. Points of contact can supply more
information.
The intent of listing these implementations is to give vendors the
opportunity to inspect working code. These implementations embody
experience with the domain system and offer interpretations of the
protocols found acceptable in operational environments.
Tops-20 Server and Resolver (JEEVES)
Some domain root servers on the ARPANET are hosted on TOPS-20 systems
and run the code called JEEVES. The JEEVES resolver is specific to
version 5 of TOPS-20. The code is maintained by Paul Mockapetris
(ISI), is available using anonymous FTP from host a.isi.edu, and
resides in the files
<domain.version5>version5.mss
<domain.version5>version5.doc
<domain.version5>version5.txt
His mail addresses are:
ARPANET: pvm@venera.isi.edu
US MAIL: USC Information Sciences Institute
4676 Admiralty Way
Marina del Rey, California 90292-6695
4BSD Unix Resolver and Server (BIND)
Most hosts running lower level domain servers on the ARPANET are
hosted on 4BSD systems and run the code called BIND. This code is
maintained for periodic releases by Mike Karels (UCB). His mail
addresses are:
ARPANET: karels@okeeffe.berkeley.edu
US MAIL: Computer Systems Research Group
Computer Science Division
Department of EE & CS
University of California
Berkeley, CA 94720
There are two distribution mailing lists that publish information
about BIND. General discussions can be received by contacting
bindrequest@ucbarpa.berkeley.edu and requesting to join the BIND
list. Information relating to testing developmental versions of BIND
can be received by contacting bind-test-request@ucbarpa.berkeley.edu
and requesting to join the BIND-TEST list.
A commercial version of BIND is distributed with Sun Microsystems'
operating system version 3.2. The point of contact is Bill Nowicki.
His addresses are:
ARPANET: nowicki@sun.com
US MAIL: Sun Microsystems
2550 Garcia Avenue
Mountain View, CA 94043
MS-DOS Server and Resolver
FTP Software is working on a port of BIND to their PC/TCP environment
under MS/DOS (their PC/TCP package). They already have a resolver
that depends on recursive queries. The point of contact is Philip A.
Prindeville. His mail addresses are:
ARPANET: pap4@ai.ai.mit.edu
US MAIL: FTP Software Inc
P.O. Box 150
Kendall Sq. Branch
Boston, MA 02142
Tops-20 Resolver
A resolver is being written in C for Tops-20 and ITS by Rob Austein.
He encourages contacts from Tops-10, WAITS, and TENEX system
programmers. His mail addresses are:
ARPANET: sra@xx.lcs.mit.edu.
US MAIL: MIT LCS NE43-503
545 Technology Square
Cambridge MA 02139
Symbolics Resolver
Symbolics Inc. has an implementation for the 36xx series Lisp
Machines. Steven L. Sneddon is the point of contact. His addresses
are:
ARPANET: sned@pegasus.scrc.symbolics.com
US MAIL: Manager, Networks and Communications
Symbolics, Inc.
11 Cambridge Center
Cambridge, MA 02142
Xerox Cedar Resolver
Xerox has a resolver running in the Cedar language/environment at
Xerox PARC. John Larson is the point of contact. His addresses are:
ARPANET: jlarson.pa@xerox.com
US MAIL: Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
3333 Coyote Hill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304
Harris Resolver
There is a domain resolver for the Harris H series that handles
canonical name, host address, name server, and mail agent (MX)
records. Bruce Orchard is the point of contact. His addresses are:
ARPANET: orchard/bruc@scarecrow.waisman.wisc.edu
US MAIL: 549 Waisman Center
University of Wisconsin-Madison
1500 Highland Avenue
Madison, Wisconsin 53705-2280
Fuzzball Server and Resolver
Dave Mills has both server and solver for the so-called PDP11/LSI- 11
Fuzzballs. However, these are not complete implementations and do
not support zone transfers and so forth. They have little use
outside the fuzzball community, since the code is in assembler and is
not for Unix. His addresses are:
ARPANET: mills@udel.edu
US MAIL: Electrical Engineering Department
University of Delaware
Newark, DE 19716
Multics Resolver
There is a resolver for Multics that is nearly ready for release.
Art Beattie is the point of contact. His addresses are:
ARPANET: beattie%pco@bco-multics.arpa
US MAIL: MS K55
Honeywell Bull
PO Box 8000
Phoenix, AZ, 85066-8000
VAX/VMS Resolver
There is a partial resolver implementation (only supports address
queries and IN-ADDR PTR lookups) that is part of the CMU/TEK TCP/IP
package for VAX/VMS. It is written in BLISS-32. Vince Fuller is the
point of contact. His addresses are:
ARPANET: vince.fuller@c.cs.cmu.edu
US MAIL: Computer Science Department
Carnegie-Mellon University
Schenley Park
Pittsburgh, Pa. 15213
Macintosh Resolver and Server
Tom Unger has ported BIND to the Macintosh. This was done using the
Macintosh Programmer's Workshop and CITI's MacIP that currently
consists of IP, UDP, and a Berkeley style socket library. His mail
addresses are:
ARPANET: tom@citi.umich.edu
US MAIL: Center for Information and Technology Integration
University of Michigan
2901 Hubbard
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
ORDERING INFORMATION
Documents are available online from the NIC (IP address 10.0.0.51 or
26.0.0.73) by using FTP with the login ANONYMOUS and the password
GUEST. RFCs are in files named RFC:RFCnnn.TXT and are simple ASCII
files ready for printing. Pages within the documents are separated
by a form feed character on a line by itself.
Hardcopy of the documents and software mentioned in the discussions
above may be obtained from the NIC or the author. Prices are
available on request and are documented in DDN Newsletter #50 (12 Dec
1986). The address and phone numbers of the NIC are listed below.
DDN Network Information Center
SRI International, Room EJ291
333 Ravenswood Avenue
Menlo Park, CA 94025
(800) 235-3155
(415) 859-3695
AI ELI5
On this page
PROBLEMEvery MILNET host needs to turn other hosts' names into addresses, but the NIC's central host table had reached the limits of manageability.
MECHANISMThe memo describes a three-stage migration from the host table to the domain system, a timetable ending with the host table being discontinued in October 1989, and a guide to the documents and software involved.
WHY IT MATTERSIt is a transition aid for implementors and administrators, not a protocol specification. Hosts that did not convert would have to get a host table equivalent by private arrangement after the host table ended.
§1Why Move Away From the Host Table
All MILNET hosts need a way to translate the name of any other host into its Internet address. The existing method was a table of all hosts, maintained by the Network Information Center (NIC). Hosts fetched it by FTP, processed it locally and scanned it. The RFC says the table's size and update frequency had reached the limits of manageability, and that it relied on a central point of information.
The domain system does the same job with a distributed database. Host resolvers query domain servers, may cache answers, and each server holds a portion of a hierarchical database under separate administrative authority. Redundancy comes from transferring data between cooperating servers.
The memo reports that the domain system had operated successfully on the ARPANET for over a year, to the point that the NIC's host table was no longer a complete list. On MILNET, host names had already been converted from a flat namespace to structured names, as required by DDN Management Bulletin #32 (22 Jan 1987), and root servers had been put in place. The next step was for hosts to stop depending on the host table.
One giant list got too big and changed too often. So the job of knowing names was shared out among many helpers, each looking after one piece.
§2The Three Migration Stages
Hosts would not all switch at once, so the RFC describes three stages that exist side by side as hosts convert.
- Host table only. The host depends entirely on the NIC's table and does local table scanning. Most hosts were in this stage. Hosts that cannot ever convert (older architectures, unchangeable software) will need to get the table equivalent from another host under a bilateral agreement, a community-of-interest repository, or a locally maintained table, because the NIC will stop maintaining the table at the end of the conversion period.
- Domain system and host table. The host uses both. A likely case is TELNET and FTP using the domain system while MAIL still uses the host table, or the reverse. This stage is viewed as transitory.
- Domain system only. Conversion is complete, including correct handling of the mailbox and mail exchanger resource records.
Some houses switch to the new system first, some use both for a while, and some switch last. Nobody has to move on the same day.
§3The Migration Timetable
The RFC gives a timetable. Operational testing of the root server software ran from December 1986 to July 1987 and had been completed. A policy was to be announced in a DDN Management Bulletin in October 1987. Host conversion would run from October 1987 to October 1989, and the host table would be discontinued in October 1989.
Voluntary conversion could begin immediately, with mandatory conversion required by October 1989. After that date, hosts that had not converted must obtain the host table equivalent by private arrangement.
Everyone gets about two years to switch. After that date the old giant list stops being handed out.
- 1986Root server operational testing begins (Dec)
- 1987Testing ends (Jul); policy announced and host conversion begins (Oct)
- 1989Host conversion ends and host table discontinued (Oct)
§5Available Implementations
So that vendors could inspect working code, the memo lists several domain system implementations. The two most mature are JEEVES, a TOPS-20 server and resolver run by some ARPANET root servers and maintained at ISI, and BIND, the 4BSD Unix resolver and server run by most lower-level domain servers on the ARPANET and maintained at UC Berkeley. A commercial BIND shipped with Sun Microsystems' operating system version 3.2.
Others listed include a MS-DOS port of BIND from FTP Software, resolvers for TOPS-20 and ITS, Symbolics Lisp machines, Xerox Cedar, the Harris H series, Multics and VAX/VMS, and server and resolver code for Fuzzballs and the Macintosh. Some are partial: the VAX/VMS resolver supports only address queries and IN-ADDR PTR lookups, and the Fuzzball code does not support zone transfers. The memo lists points of contact for each.
The memo lists who already built working versions of the new system for different kinds of computers, so others can look at their work.
§6References
[RFC799]RFC 799Internet Name Domains, RFC 799.September 1981[RFC920]RFC 920Domain Requirements, RFC 920.October 1984[RFC952]RFC 952Internet Host Table Specification, RFC 952.October 1985[RFC974]RFC 974Mail Routing and the Domain System, RFC 974.January 1986[RFC1034]RFC 1034Domain Names - Concepts and Facilities, RFC 1034.November 1987[RFC1035]RFC 1035Domain Names - Implementation Specification, RFC 1035.November 1987