mirror of
https://git.openafs.org/openafs.git
synced 2025-01-18 15:00:12 +00:00
6bde63c465
Add a copy of RFC 5864 (DNS SRV Resource Records for AFS) to the protocol documentation directory for reference. As permitted by the IETF Trust License Policy section 3(e), I release this document under the MIT/X Consortium license included in this copy of the document. LICENSE MIT Change-Id: I8e22aac07b4cedbe18b8375213a7866cf98a1386 Reviewed-on: http://gerrit.openafs.org/1799 Tested-by: Derrick Brashear <shadow@dementia.org> Reviewed-by: Derrick Brashear <shadow@dementia.org>
588 lines
25 KiB
Plaintext
588 lines
25 KiB
Plaintext
This file is a copy of RFC 5864 as published by the RFC Editor with the
|
||
addition of the following license grant.
|
||
|
||
As a special additional grant of rights as permitted by section 3(e) of
|
||
the IETF Trust License Policy (December 28, 2009), in addition to the
|
||
rights granted in the Copyright Notice below, Russ Allbery, as the sole
|
||
author of this document, releases it under the following license:
|
||
|
||
Copyright 2009, 2010 Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
|
||
Copyright 2010 IETF Trust
|
||
|
||
Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this document for any
|
||
purpose and without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above
|
||
copyright notice appear in all copies and that both that copyright
|
||
notice and this permission notice appear in supporting documentation,
|
||
and that the name of its authors not be used in advertising or
|
||
publicity pertaining to distribution of this document without specific,
|
||
written prior permission. Its authors make no representations about
|
||
the suitability of this document for any purpose. It is provided "as
|
||
is" without express or implied warranty.
|
||
|
||
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND WITHOUT ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED
|
||
WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
|
||
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) R. Allbery
|
||
Request for Comments: 5864 Stanford University
|
||
Updates: 1183 April 2010
|
||
Category: Standards Track
|
||
ISSN: 2070-1721
|
||
|
||
|
||
DNS SRV Resource Records for AFS
|
||
|
||
Abstract
|
||
|
||
This document specifies how to use DNS (Domain Name Service) SRV RRs
|
||
(Resource Records) to locate services for the AFS distributed file
|
||
system and how the priority and weight values of the SRV RR should be
|
||
interpreted in the server ranking system used by AFS. It updates RFC
|
||
1183 to deprecate the use of the AFSDB RR to locate AFS cell database
|
||
servers and provides guidance for backward compatibility.
|
||
|
||
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 5741.
|
||
|
||
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
|
||
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
|
||
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5864.
|
||
|
||
Copyright Notice
|
||
|
||
Copyright (c) 2010 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
|
||
(http://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 Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
|
||
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
|
||
described in the Simplified BSD License.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Allbery Standards Track [Page 1]
|
||
|
||
RFC 5864 DNS SRV RRs for AFS April 2010
|
||
|
||
|
||
Table of Contents
|
||
|
||
1. Overview and Rationale ..........................................2
|
||
2. Scope ...........................................................3
|
||
3. Requirements Notation ...........................................3
|
||
4. DNS SRV RRs for AFS .............................................4
|
||
4.1. Interpretation as AFS Preference Ranks .....................5
|
||
5. Use of AFSDB RRs ................................................6
|
||
6. Example .........................................................8
|
||
7. Security Considerations .........................................9
|
||
8. References ......................................................9
|
||
8.1. Normative References .......................................9
|
||
8.2. Informative References ....................................10
|
||
|
||
1. Overview and Rationale
|
||
|
||
AFS (a registered trademark of IBM Corporation) is a distributed file
|
||
system (see [AFS1] and [AFS2]). Its most widely used implementations
|
||
are [OPENAFS] and [ARLA].
|
||
|
||
AFS is organized administratively into cells. Each AFS cell consists
|
||
of one or more Volume Location Database (VLDB) servers, one or more
|
||
Protection Service (PTS) servers, and one or more file servers and
|
||
volume servers, plus possible additional services not relevant to
|
||
this document. Data stored in AFS is divided into collections of
|
||
files called volumes. An AFS protocol client, when accessing a file
|
||
within a specific AFS cell, first contacts a VLDB server for that
|
||
cell to determine the file server for the AFS volume in which that
|
||
file is located, and then contacts that file server directly to
|
||
access the file. A client may also need to contact a PTS server for
|
||
that cell to register before accessing files in that cell or to query
|
||
protection database information.
|
||
|
||
An AFS client therefore needs to determine, for a given AFS cell, the
|
||
VLDB and possibly the PTS servers for that cell. (Traditionally, the
|
||
VLDB and PTS servers are provided by the same host.) Once the client
|
||
is in contact with the VLDB server, it locates file and volume
|
||
servers through AFS protocol queries to the VLDB server. Originally,
|
||
VLDB server information was configured separately on each client in a
|
||
file called the CellServDB file. [RFC1183] specified the DNS RR
|
||
(Resource Record) AFSDB to locate VLDB servers for AFS.
|
||
|
||
Subsequent to [RFC1183], a general DNS RR was defined by [RFC2782]
|
||
for service location for any service. This DNS SRV RR has several
|
||
advantages over the AFSDB RR:
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Allbery Standards Track [Page 2]
|
||
|
||
RFC 5864 DNS SRV RRs for AFS April 2010
|
||
|
||
|
||
o AFSDB RRs do not support priority or ranking, leaving AFS cell
|
||
administrators without a way to indicate which VLDB servers
|
||
clients should prefer.
|
||
|
||
o AFSDB RRs do not include protocol or port information, implicitly
|
||
assuming that all VLDB servers will be contacted over the standard
|
||
port and the UDP. Future changes to the AFS protocol may require
|
||
separate VLDB server lists for UDP and TCP traffic, and some uses
|
||
of AFS, such as providing VLDB service for multiple cells from the
|
||
same systems, require use of different ports.
|
||
|
||
o Clients using AFSDB RRs must assume that VLDB and PTS services are
|
||
provided by the same host, but it may be useful to separate VLDB
|
||
servers from PTS servers.
|
||
|
||
o DNS SRV RRs are in widespread use, whereas AFSDB RRs are a little-
|
||
known and little-supported corner of the DNS protocol.
|
||
|
||
For those reasons, it is desirable to move AFS service location from
|
||
the AFSDB RR to DNS SRV RRs.
|
||
|
||
2. Scope
|
||
|
||
This document describes the format and use of DNS SRV RRs for AFS
|
||
service location and deprecates the AFSDB RR. It also provides
|
||
guidance for transition from the AFSDB RR to DNS SRV RRs and
|
||
recommendations for backward compatibility.
|
||
|
||
Documentation of the AFS protocol, the exact purpose and use of the
|
||
VLDB and PTS services, and other information about AFS are outside
|
||
the scope of this document.
|
||
|
||
AFSDB RRs may also be used for locating servers for the Open Software
|
||
Foundation's (OSF's) Distributed Computing Environment (DCE)
|
||
authenticated naming system, as described in [RFC1183]. Service
|
||
location for DCE servers is outside the scope of this document and is
|
||
not modified by this specification.
|
||
|
||
3. Requirements Notation
|
||
|
||
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
|
||
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
|
||
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Allbery Standards Track [Page 3]
|
||
|
||
RFC 5864 DNS SRV RRs for AFS April 2010
|
||
|
||
|
||
4. DNS SRV RRs for AFS
|
||
|
||
The label of a DNS SRV RR, as defined in [RFC2782], is:
|
||
|
||
_<service>._<proto>.<name>
|
||
|
||
The following values for <service> advertise servers providing AFS
|
||
services:
|
||
|
||
afs3-vlserver: servers providing AFS VLDB services.
|
||
|
||
afs3-prserver: servers providing AFS PTS services.
|
||
|
||
Other AFS services, such as file and volume management services, are
|
||
located through the VLDB service and therefore do not use DNS SRV
|
||
RRs.
|
||
|
||
<proto> MUST be "udp" for the current AFS protocol, which uses Rx
|
||
over UDP. Other values may be used for future revisions of the AFS
|
||
protocol supporting other protocols, such as Rx over TCP.
|
||
|
||
<name> MUST be the AFS cell name for which the identified server
|
||
provides AFS services. Clients MUST query DNS SRV RRs only for a
|
||
<name> value exactly matching the AFS cell of interest. They MUST
|
||
NOT remove leading components to search for more general DNS SRV RRs.
|
||
The AFS cell "prod.example.com" and the AFS cell "example.com" are
|
||
entirely different cells in the AFS protocol and VLDB servers for the
|
||
latter cannot provide information for the former.
|
||
|
||
NOTE: As with AFSDB RRs, this means that DNS SRV RRs can only be
|
||
used to locate AFS services for cells whose naming matches the
|
||
structure of the DNS. This is not a requirement of the AFS
|
||
protocol, but sites creating new AFS cells SHOULD use names that
|
||
follow the structure of the DNS and that result in DNS SRV RRs
|
||
under their administrative control. This both permits use of DNS
|
||
SRV RRs instead of client configuration and helps avoid naming
|
||
conflicts between separate AFS cells.
|
||
|
||
DNS SRV RRs include a priority and a weight. As defined in the DNS
|
||
SRV RR specification [RFC2782], clients MUST attempt to contact the
|
||
target host with the lowest-numbered priority they can reach. AFS
|
||
clients that use a ranked algorithm to determine which server to
|
||
contact MUST therefore assign a sufficiently distinct rank to targets
|
||
with different priorities such that targets with a higher-numbered
|
||
priority are only contacted if all targets with a lower-numbered
|
||
priority are inaccessible. See Section 4.1 for more information.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Allbery Standards Track [Page 4]
|
||
|
||
RFC 5864 DNS SRV RRs for AFS April 2010
|
||
|
||
|
||
If there are multiple targets with an equal priority, the weight
|
||
value of the DNS SRV RR SHOULD be used as input to a weighted
|
||
algorithm for selecting servers. As specified by [RFC2782], larger
|
||
weights SHOULD be given a proportionately higher probability of being
|
||
selected. In the presence of records containing weights greater than
|
||
0, records with weight 0 should have a very small chance of being
|
||
selected. A weight of 0 SHOULD be used if all targets with that
|
||
priority are weighted equally. AFS clients MAY take into account
|
||
network performance and other protocol metrics along with SRV RR
|
||
weights when selecting servers, thereby possibly selecting different
|
||
servers than a system based purely on the SRV RRs would indicate.
|
||
However, such information MUST NOT override the priority information
|
||
in the SRV RR.
|
||
|
||
DNS SRV RRs, like all DNS RRs, have a time-to-live (TTL), after which
|
||
the SRV record information is no longer valid (see [RFC1034]). DNS
|
||
RRs SHOULD be discarded after their TTL, and after the DNS query
|
||
repeated. This applies to DNS SRV RRs for AFS as it does for any
|
||
other DNS RR. Any information derived from the DNS SRV RRs, such as
|
||
preference ranks, MUST be discarded when the DNS SRV RR is expired.
|
||
|
||
Implementations are not required to re-run the weighted server
|
||
selection algorithm for each call. Instead, they MAY reuse the
|
||
results of the algorithm until the DNS SRV RRs expire. Clients could
|
||
therefore use a specific server for the lifetime of the DNS SRV
|
||
records, which may affect the load distribution properties that DNS
|
||
SRV records provide. Server operators should account for this effect
|
||
when setting the TTL of those records.
|
||
|
||
AFS clients MAY remember which targets are inaccessible by that
|
||
client and ignore those targets when determining which server to
|
||
contact first. Clients that do this SHOULD have a mechanism to retry
|
||
targets that were previously inaccessible and reconsider them
|
||
according to their current priority and weight if they become
|
||
accessible again.
|
||
|
||
4.1. Interpretation as AFS Preference Ranks
|
||
|
||
Several AFS implementations use a ranking algorithm that assigns
|
||
numbers representing a preference rank to each server when the client
|
||
first contacts that AFS cell and then prefers the server with the
|
||
lowest rank unless that server goes down. Clients using this
|
||
algorithm SHOULD assign their ranks as follows:
|
||
|
||
1. Sort targets by priority and assign a base rank value to each
|
||
target based on its priority. Each base rank value MUST be
|
||
sufficiently different from the base rank assigned to any higher-
|
||
numbered priority so that higher-numbered targets will only be
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Allbery Standards Track [Page 5]
|
||
|
||
RFC 5864 DNS SRV RRs for AFS April 2010
|
||
|
||
|
||
attempted if lower-numbered targets cannot be reached. It MUST,
|
||
in other words, be farther from the base rank of any distinct
|
||
priority than any possible automatic adjustment in the rank.
|
||
When calculating base ranks, observe that the numeric value of a
|
||
priority has no meaning. Only the ordering of distinct priority
|
||
values between multiple SRV RR targets needs to be reflected in
|
||
the base ranks.
|
||
|
||
2. For each group of targets with the same priority, follow the
|
||
algorithm in [RFC2782] to order those targets. Then, assign
|
||
those targets ranks formed by incrementing the base weight for
|
||
that priority such that the first selected target has the lowest
|
||
rank, the second selected target has the next-lowest rank, and so
|
||
on.
|
||
|
||
After assignment of ranks, the AFS client MAY then adjust the ranks
|
||
dynamically based on network performance and other protocol metrics,
|
||
provided that such adjustments are sufficiently small compared to the
|
||
difference between base ranks that they cannot cause servers with a
|
||
higher-numbered priority to be contacted instead of a server with a
|
||
lower-numbered priority.
|
||
|
||
The TTL of the DNS SRV RRs MUST be honored by invalidating and
|
||
regenerating the server preference ranks with new DNS information
|
||
once that TTL has expired. However, accumulated network and protocol
|
||
metrics may be retained and reapplied to the new rankings.
|
||
|
||
AFS server preference ranks are conventionally numbers between 1 and
|
||
65535. DNS SRV RR priorities are numbers between 0 and 65535.
|
||
Implementations following this algorithm could therefore encounter
|
||
problems assigning sufficiently distinct base rank values in
|
||
exceptional cases of very large numbers of DNS SRV RR targets with
|
||
different priorities. However, an AFS cell configuration with
|
||
thousands of DNS SRV RR targets for an AFS VLDB or PTS service with
|
||
meaningfully distinct priorities is highly improbable. AFS client
|
||
implementations encountering a DNS SRV RR containing targets with
|
||
more distinct priority values than can be correctly represented as
|
||
base ranks SHOULD fall back to generating ranks based solely on
|
||
priorities, ignoring other rank inputs, and disabling dynamic
|
||
adjustment of ranks. Implementations MUST be able to assign distinct
|
||
base ranks as described above for at least ten distinct priority
|
||
values.
|
||
|
||
5. Use of AFSDB RRs
|
||
|
||
Since many AFS client implementations currently support AFSDB RRs but
|
||
do not support DNS SRV RRs, AFS cells providing DNS SRV RRs SHOULD
|
||
also provide AFSDB RRs. However, be aware that AFSDB RRs do not
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Allbery Standards Track [Page 6]
|
||
|
||
RFC 5864 DNS SRV RRs for AFS April 2010
|
||
|
||
|
||
provide priority or weighting information; all servers listed in
|
||
ASFDB RRs are treated as equal. AFSDB RRs also do not provide port
|
||
information.
|
||
|
||
An AFS cell using DNS SRV RRs SHOULD therefore also provide an AFSDB
|
||
RR listing all AFS servers for which the following statements are all
|
||
true:
|
||
|
||
o The server provides both VLDB and PTS service on the standard
|
||
ports (7003 and 7002, respectively).
|
||
|
||
o The server provides these services via Rx over UDP.
|
||
|
||
o The server either has the lowest-numbered priority of those listed
|
||
in the DNS SRV RRs or the AFS cell administrator believes it
|
||
reasonable for clients using AFSDB RRs to use this server by
|
||
preference.
|
||
|
||
The above is a default recommendation. AFS cell administrators MAY
|
||
use different lists of servers in the AFSDB RRs and DNS SRV RRs if
|
||
desired for specific effects based on local knowledge of which
|
||
clients use AFSDB RRs and which clients use DNS SRV RRs. However,
|
||
AFS servers SHOULD NOT be advertised with AFSDB RRs unless they
|
||
provide VLDB and PTS services via UDP on the standard ports. (This
|
||
falls shy of MUST NOT because it may be useful in some unusual
|
||
circumstances to advertise, via an AFSDB RR, a server that provides
|
||
only one of the two services, but be aware that such a configuration
|
||
may confuse legacy clients.)
|
||
|
||
An AFS cell SHOULD have at least one VLDB and at least one PTS server
|
||
providing service on the standard ports of 7003 and 7002,
|
||
respectively, since clients without DNS SRV RR support cannot locate
|
||
servers on non-standard ports.
|
||
|
||
Clients SHOULD query DNS SRV RRs by default but SHOULD then fall back
|
||
on AFSDB RRs if no DNS SRV RRs are found. In the absence of DNS SRV
|
||
RRs, an AFSDB RR of <subtype> 1 SHOULD be treated as equivalent to
|
||
the following pair of DNS SRV RRs:
|
||
|
||
_afs3-vlserver._udp.<cell> <ttl> IN SRV 0 0 7003 <hostname>
|
||
_afs3-prserver._udp.<cell> <ttl> IN SRV 0 0 7002 <hostname>
|
||
|
||
<cell> is the label of the AFSDB RR, <ttl> is its TTL and <hostname>
|
||
is the <hostname> value of the AFSDB RR as specified in [RFC1183].
|
||
This is the fully-qualified domain name of the server.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Allbery Standards Track [Page 7]
|
||
|
||
RFC 5864 DNS SRV RRs for AFS April 2010
|
||
|
||
|
||
6. Example
|
||
|
||
The following example includes TCP AFS services, separation of a PTS
|
||
server from a VLDB server, and use of non-standard ports, all
|
||
features that either assume future AFS protocol development or are
|
||
not widely supported by current clients. This example is intended to
|
||
show the range of possibilities for AFS DNS SRV RRs, not as a
|
||
practical example for an existing cell. This is a part of the zone
|
||
file for a fictional example.com domain with AFS services.
|
||
|
||
$ORIGIN example.com.
|
||
@ SOA dns.example.com. root.example.com. (
|
||
2009100201 3600 3600 604800 86400 )
|
||
NS dns.example.com.
|
||
_afs3-vlserver._udp SRV 0 2 7003 afsdb1.example.com.
|
||
_afs3-vlserver._udp SRV 0 4 7003 afsdb2.example.com.
|
||
_afs3-vlserver._udp SRV 1 0 65500 afsdb3.example.com.
|
||
|
||
_afs3-vlserver._tcp SRV 0 0 7003 afsdb3.example.com.
|
||
|
||
_afs3-prserver._udp SRV 0 0 7002 afsdb1.example.com.
|
||
|
||
_afs3-prserver._tcp SRV 0 0 7002 afsdb3.example.com.
|
||
|
||
@ AFSDB 1 afsdb1.example.com.
|
||
|
||
dns A 192.0.2.9
|
||
afsdb1 A 192.0.2.10
|
||
afsdb2 A 192.0.2.11
|
||
afsdb3 A 192.0.2.12
|
||
|
||
In this example, the AFS cell name is example.com.
|
||
|
||
afsdb1, afsdb2, and afsdb3 all provide VLDB service via UDP. The
|
||
first two have the same priority but have weights indicating that
|
||
afsdb1 should get about twice as many clients as afsdb2. afsdb3
|
||
should only be used for UDP VLDB service if afsdb1 and afsdb2 are not
|
||
accessible and provides that service on a non-standard port (65500).
|
||
|
||
Only one host, afsdb1, provides UDP PTS service.
|
||
|
||
afsdb3 provides a hypothetical TCP version of AFS VLDB and PTS
|
||
service on the standard ports and is the only server providing these
|
||
services over TCP for this cell. Such a TCP-based AFS protocol did
|
||
not exist at the time this document was written. This example only
|
||
shows what the record would look like in a hypothetical future if
|
||
such a protocol were developed.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Allbery Standards Track [Page 8]
|
||
|
||
RFC 5864 DNS SRV RRs for AFS April 2010
|
||
|
||
|
||
An AFSDB RR is provided for backward compatibility with older
|
||
clients. It lists only afsdb1, since only that host provides both
|
||
VLDB and PTS service over UDP on the standard ports.
|
||
|
||
7. Security Considerations
|
||
|
||
Use of DNS SRV RRs for AFS service locations poses the same security
|
||
issues as the existing AFSDB RRs. Specifically, unless the integrity
|
||
and authenticity of the DNS response are checked, an attacker may
|
||
forge DNS replies and thereby direct clients at a VLDB or PTS server
|
||
under the control of the attacker. From there, the attacker may
|
||
deceive an AFS client about the volumes and file servers in a cell
|
||
and about the contents of files and directories in that cell. If the
|
||
client uses cell data in a trusted way, such as by executing programs
|
||
out of that AFS cell or using data from the cell as input to other
|
||
programs, the attacker may be able to further compromise the security
|
||
of the client and trick it into taking action under the attacker's
|
||
control.
|
||
|
||
This attack can be prevented if the server is authenticated, since
|
||
the client can then detect a failure to authenticate the attacker's
|
||
servers and thereby detect possible impersonation. However, this
|
||
applies only to authenticated AFS access, and much AFS access is
|
||
unauthenticated. Furthermore, clients after failure to authenticate
|
||
may fall back to unauthenticated access, which the attacker's servers
|
||
may permit.
|
||
|
||
Using an integrity-protected DNS system such as DNS Security (DNSSEC)
|
||
[RFC4033] can prevent this attack via DNS. However, the underlying
|
||
vulnerability is inherent in the current AFS protocol and may be
|
||
exploited in ways other than DNS forgery, such as by forging the
|
||
results of VLDB queries for an AFS cell. Addressing it properly
|
||
requires changes to the AFS protocol allowing clients to always
|
||
authenticate AFS services and discard unauthenticated data. Even in
|
||
the absence of a DNS system with integrity protection, addition of
|
||
DNS SRV RRs does not make this vulnerability more severe, only opens
|
||
another equivalent point of attack.
|
||
|
||
8. References
|
||
|
||
8.1. Normative References
|
||
|
||
[RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities",
|
||
STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987.
|
||
|
||
[RFC1183] Everhart, C., Mamakos, L., Ullmann, R., and P.
|
||
Mockapetris, "New DNS RR Definitions", RFC 1183,
|
||
October 1990.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Allbery Standards Track [Page 9]
|
||
|
||
RFC 5864 DNS SRV RRs for AFS April 2010
|
||
|
||
|
||
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
|
||
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
|
||
|
||
[RFC2782] Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P., and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for
|
||
specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782,
|
||
February 2000.
|
||
|
||
8.2. Informative References
|
||
|
||
[AFS1] Howard, J., Kazar, M., Menees, S., Nichols, D.,
|
||
Satyanarayanan, M., Sidebotham, R., and M. West, "Scale
|
||
and Performance in a Distributed File System", ACM Trans.
|
||
on Computer Systems 6(1), February 1988.
|
||
|
||
[AFS2] Howard, J., "An Overview of the Andrew File System", CMU-
|
||
ITC 88-062, February 1988.
|
||
|
||
[ARLA] Assar Westerlund, et al., "Arla", May 2001,
|
||
<http://www.stacken.kth.se/project/arla/html/arla.html>.
|
||
|
||
[OPENAFS] IBM Corporation, et al., "OpenAFS Documentation",
|
||
April 2000, <http://docs.openafs.org/>.
|
||
|
||
[RFC4033] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
|
||
Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements",
|
||
RFC 4033, March 2005.
|
||
|
||
Author's Address
|
||
|
||
Russ Allbery
|
||
Stanford University
|
||
P.O. Box 20066
|
||
Stanford, CA 94309
|
||
US
|
||
|
||
EMail: rra@stanford.edu
|
||
URI: http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Allbery Standards Track [Page 10]
|
||
|