Network Working Group                                          A. Newton
Request for Comments: 3982                                VeriSign, Inc.
Category: Standards Track                                        M. Sanz
                                                                DENIC eG
                                                            January 2005

             IRIS:  A Domain Registry (dreg) Type for the
              Internet Registry Information Service (IRIS)

Status of This Memo

   This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
   Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
   improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
   Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
   and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).

Abstract

   This document describes an Internet Registry Information Service
   (IRIS) registry schema for registered DNS information.  The schema
   extends the necessary query and result operations of IRIS to provide
   the functional information service needs for syntaxes and results
   used by domain registries and registrars.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2
   2.  Document Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3.  Schema Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
       3.1.  Query Derivatives  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
             3.1.1.   Query . . . . . . . . . .  3
             3.1.2.   Query . . . . . . . . . .  4
             3.1.3.   Query  . . . . . . . . . . .  4
             3.1.4.   Query . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
             3.1.5.   Query . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
             3.1.6.   Query  . . . . . . . . . . .  5
             3.1.7.  Contact Search Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
       3.2.  Result Derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
             3.2.1.  Privacy Labels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
             3.2.2.   Result  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
             3.2.3.   Result  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
             3.2.4.   Result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Newton & Sanz               Standards Track                     [Page 1]

RFC 3982                       IRIS-Dreg                    January 2005

             3.2.5.    . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       3.3.  Generic Code Derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
             3.3.1.    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
             3.3.2.   . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
       3.4.  Support for   . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   4.  Formal XML Syntax  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   5.  BEEP Transport Compliance  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
       5.1.  Message Pattern  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
       5.2.  Server Authentication  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
   6.  URI Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
       6.1.  Application Service Label  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
       6.2.  Bottom-Up Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
       6.3.  Top-Down Resolution  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
   7.  Internationalization Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
   8.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
       8.1.  XML Namespace URN Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
       8.2.  S-NAPTR Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
       8.3.  BEEP Registration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
   9.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
   10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
       10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
       10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
   A.  Examples of Requests and Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
       A.1.  Example 1  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
       A.2.  Example 2  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
       A.3.  Example 3  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
   B.  An Example of Database Serialization . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
   C.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
   Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

1.  Introduction

   This document describes an IRIS registry schema for Internet domain
   registries using an XML Schema [4] derived from and using the IRIS
   [5] schema.  The query and result types outlined in this document are
   based on the functional requirements described in CRISP [17].

   The schema given is this document is specified by using the
   Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0, as described in XML [1]; XML
   Schema notation, as described in XML_SD [3] and XML_SS [4]; and XML
   Namespaces, as described in XML_NS [2].

   Examples of client/server XML exchanges with this registry type are
   available in Appendix A.

Newton & Sanz               Standards Track                     [Page 2]

RFC 3982                       IRIS-Dreg                    January 2005

2.  Document Terminology

   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 BCP 14, RFC 2119 [10].

3.  Schema Description

   IRIS requires the derivation of both query and result elements by a
   registry schema.  These descriptions follow.

   References to XML elements without a namespace qualifier are from the
   schema defined in Section 4.  References to elements and attributes
   with the "iris" XML namespace qualifier are from the schema defined
   in IRIS [5].

   The descriptions contained within this section refer to XML elements
   and attributes and their relation to the exchange of data within the
   protocol.  These descriptions also contain specifications outside the
   scope of the formal XML syntax.  This section will use terms defined
   by RFC 2119 [10] to describe these.  While reading this section,
   please reference Section 4 for needed details on the formal XML
   syntax.

3.1.  Query Derivatives

3.1.1.   Query

    searches for a registration authority
   designated as a registrar for the registry of the server.

   If present, the  element MUST restrict the results of the
   search to registrars capable of registering subdomains in the domain
   signified by the content of this element.

   The  element restricts the scope of the query with its
   child elements.  The  element specifies the beginning of
   the registrar's name.  The  element specifies the end of
   the registrar's name.  The  element specifies equivalence
   to the registrar's name.

   If the  element is not present, the query MUST return all
   registrars applicable (i.e., in consideration of ).

   This query MUST return a result set of zero or more
    elements.  See Section 3.2.5.

Newton & Sanz               Standards Track                     [Page 3]

RFC 3982                       IRIS-Dreg                    January 2005

3.1.2.   Query

    finds domains by searches on fields associated
   with a domain's contact.  A search constraint of  MUST
   restrict the results to domains underneath the domain specified by
   its content, if it is present.

   The allowable search fields are handled with either the
    element or one of the elements in the
   "contactSearchGroup" (see Section 3.1.7).  The 
   element allows the domains to be selected based on the contact having
   the specified contact handle.

   The query MAY also be constrained further by using the optional
    element.  The contents of this element signify the role the
   contact has with the domain.

   This query also provides optional  elements containing
   language tags.  Clients MAY use these elements to hint about the
   natural language(s) of the affected element.  Servers MAY use this
   information in processing the query, such as in tailoring
   normalization routines to aid in more effective searches.

3.1.3.   Query

   The  query finds domains by the name of a domain
   as it is known in DNS.  The  element restricts the scope of
   the query with its child elements.  The  element
   specifies the beginning of the domain name.  The  element
   specifies the end of the domain name.

3.1.4.   Query

   This query differs from the  query by allowing the
   scope of the query to take internationalized domain names into
   consideration.  This query will return the union of the desired
   domain and any associated variants, therefore differing from a lookup
   in the "idn" entity class (Section 3.4) (which only returns the
   domain or no results).

   The  element restricts the scope of the query with its
   child element.  Its child, the  element, is designed to
   contain IDNs and not ACE labels, and thus MUST match only against
   equivalent IDNs, according to the notion of equivalence defined in
   RFC 3490 [14].

   This query also provides optional  elements containing
   language tags.  Clients MAY use these elements to hint about the

Newton & Sanz               Standards Track                     [Page 4]

RFC 3982                       IRIS-Dreg                    January 2005

   natural language(s) of the affected element.  Servers MAY use this
   information in processing the query, such as in tailoring
   normalization routines to aid in more effective searches.

3.1.5.   Query

    searches for contacts given search constraints.  The
   allowable search fields are handled by one of the elements in the
   "contactSearchGroup" (see Section 3.1.7).

   This query also provides optional  elements containing
   language tags.  Clients MAY use these elements to hint about the
   natural language(s) of the affected element.  Servers MAY use this
   information in processing the query, such as in tailoring
   normalization routines to aid in more effective searches.

3.1.6.   Query

   This query does a simple search for the domains being hosted by a
   name server.  The search is constrained by using either the host name
   [12], host handle, IPv4 address, or IPv6 address of the name server.

3.1.7.  Contact Search Group

   Some of the queries above have similar query constraints for
   searching on contacts.  This section describes those common
   parameters.

    allows the query to be constrained based on the common
   name of the contact.  The constraint can constrain the query either
   by an exact match using the  element, or by a subset of
   the common name using the  and  elements.

    allows the query to be constrained based on the
   organization name of the contact.  It has the same semantics as the
    element.

    constrains the query based on the e-mail address of the
   contact.  This may be done by an exact e-mail address using the
    element or by any e-mail address in a domain using the
    element.  The  element MUST only contain a valid
   domain name (i.e., without an '@' symbol), and the matching SHOULD
   take place only on the domain given (i.e., no partial matches with
   respect to substrings or parent domains).  If either the contents of
   the  element or the domain part of the contents of the
    element contain a name with non-ASCII characters, they
   MUST be normalized according to the processes of RFC 3491 [15].

Newton & Sanz               Standards Track                     [Page 5]

RFC 3982                       IRIS-Dreg                    January 2005

   The , , and  elements restrict the scope of
   the query based on the city, region, or postal code of the contact,
   respectively.  Each must only contain an  element
   containing the exact city, region, or postal code (i.e., no substring
   searches).

3.2.  Result Derivatives

3.2.1.  Privacy Labels

   Several of the results in this registry type have values that cannot
   be given but must be specified as present or must be flagged so that
   clients do not divulge them.  In order to achieve this, some of the
   results use the following element types:

   o  "dateTimePrivacyType" -- contains the XML Schema [3] data type
      "dateTime".  The contents of this element MUST be specified by
      using the 'Z' indicator for Coordinated Universal Time (UTC).

   o  "stringPrivacyType" -- contains the XML Schema [3] data type
      "string".

   o  "normalizedStringPrivacyType" -- contains the XML Schema [3] data
      type "normalizedString".

   o  "tokenPrivacyType" -- contains the XML Schema [3] data type
      "token".

   o  "domainStatusType" -- contains the optional element of
      , indicating the date and time when the status was
      applied, and the optional element of  with the
      required attribute 'language', indicating a description of the
      status.  This element also has the optional attribute 'scope',
      indicating the scope or origin of the status value.

   o  "contactTypeType" -- contains optional  child
      elements.  Each  child element requires a 'language'
      attribute.

   As specified, these elements can have nil values and therefore may be
   present with empty content or present with their specified content.
   The use of these elements is also optional.

   If present without content, each of these element types MUST have one
   or more of the following boolean attributes:

   o  'private' -- If true, this specifies that the content is absent
      because it may never be published.

Newton & Sanz               Standards Track                     [Page 6]

RFC 3982                       IRIS-Dreg                    January 2005

   o  'denied' -- If true, this specifies that the content is absent
      because policy does not allow it to be given at the current level
      of access.

   If present with content, each of these element types MAY have one or
   more of the following boolean attributes:

   o  'doNotRedistribute' -- If true, this specifies that the content is
      not to be redistributed.

   o  'specialAccess' -- If true, this specifies that the content has
       been provided due to special access rights.

   These boolean attributes SHOULD be used in accordance with the level
   of access granted to the recipient of the data.  For example, marking
   data as 'private' or 'denied' is to be expected if the user is
   anonymous or has some other low level of access that does not warrant
   viewing that particular data.  Likewise, data marked with
   'doNotRedistribute' or 'specialAccess' is to be expected if the user
   is authenticated and has a high level of access.

3.2.2.   Result

   An example of a  result:

   
     example.com
     tcs-com-1
     
     
     
     

Newton & Sanz               Standards Track                     [Page 7]

RFC 3982                       IRIS-Dreg                    January 2005

     
   

   The  result represents an instance of a domain assignment.
   The children of the  element are as follows:

   o   -- the full name of the domain as it is in DNS.  The
      contents of this element MUST be a domain name as specified by RFC
      1035 [9].

   o   -- the name of the domain in nameprep form, if applicable.
      See RFC 3491 [15].

   o   -- a registry unique assigned identifier for a
      domain.

   o   -- MUST contain an entity reference to a referent of
      type  (Section 3.2.3).

   o   -- contains an entity reference to the registrant of
      this domain.  The referent MUST be a  result (Section
      3.2.4).

   o  Domain contacts -- the following elements contain an entity
      reference with a relationship to the domain.  The referent of each
      MUST be a  (Section 3.2.4).
      *  
      *  
      *  
      *  
      *  
      *  
      *  
      *  

   o   -- This may contain at least one of the following
      elements of type 'domainStatusType' (see Section 3.2.1), but none
      of these elements may appear more than once.
      *   -- permanently inactive
      *   -- normal state
      *   -- registration assigned but delegation
         inactive
      *   -- dispute
      *   -- database purge pending
      *   -- change of authority pending
      *   -- on hold by registry
      *   -- on hold by registrar

Newton & Sanz               Standards Track                     [Page 8]

RFC 3982                       IRIS-Dreg                    January 2005

   o   -- contains an entity reference, the referent of
      which MUST be a  (Section 3.2.2).

   o   -- contains an entity reference, the
      referent of which MUST be a  (Section 3.2.2).  This
      element is intended to point to the downstream registration
      reference.  Therefore, if this is a result given back by a domain
      registry, it should point to the domain in the domain registrar or
      registrant service.

   o   -- contains an entity reference specifying the domain
      registry operator for this domain, which MUST be a
       (Section 3.2.5).  This element has an
      optional boolean 'hosting' attribute.  When the value of this
      attribute is positive, it indicates that the registry is
      responsible for authoritatively answering DNS queries for this
      domain.

   o   -- contains an entity reference specifying the domain
      registrar operator for this domain, which MUST be a
       (Section 3.2.5).  This element has an
      optional boolean 'hosting' attribute.  When the value of this
      attribute is positive, it indicates that the registrar is
      responsible for authoratively answering DNS queries for this
      domain.

   o   -- contains the date and time of the
      initial delegation of this domain.

   o   -- contains the date and time of last
      renewal of this domain.

   o   -- contains the date and time of the
      expiration of this domain.

   o   -- specifies the last time a
      contact for the domain was added or removed.

   o   -- contains an entity reference.  The
      referent MUST be a  (Section 3.2.4) responsible for the
      last addition or removal of a contact for this domain.

   o   -- contains the date and time
      of the last time one of the nameservers was added or removed for
      the delegation of this domain.

Newton & Sanz               Standards Track                     [Page 9]

RFC 3982                       IRIS-Dreg                    January 2005

   o   -- contains an entity reference.
      The referent MUST be a  result (Section 3.2.4) and MUST
      be responsible for the last addition or removal of a nameserver
      for this domain.

   o   -- contains the date and time of the
      last time the data for this domain was verified by the responsible
      registration authority.

   o   -- contains an entity reference specifying a
      referent indirectly associated with this domain.

3.2.3.   Result

    An example of a  result:

   
     nsol184
     a.iana-servers.net
     192.0.2.43
     
   

   The  element represents an instance of a host registration.
   The children of the  element are as follows:

   o   -- a registry unique assigned identifier for the
      host.

   o   -- the fully qualified domain name of the host.  The
      contents of this element are a domain name and MUST conform to RFC
      1035 [9].

   o   -- the content of this MUST conform to the a valid
      IP version 4 host address, as specified by RFC 791 [8].

   o   -- the content of this MUST conform to the a valid
      IP version 6 host address, as specified by RFC 3513 [7].

   o   -- contains an entity reference specifying a contact
      associated with this host.  The referent MUST be 
      (Section 3.2.4) results.

Newton & Sanz               Standards Track                    [Page 10]

RFC 3982                       IRIS-Dreg                    January 2005

   o   -- contains the date and time when this host was
      created.

   o   -- contains the date and time when this
      host was last modified.

   o   -- contains the date and time when this
      data for this host was last verified to be correct by the
      appropriate registration authority.

   o   -- contains an entity reference specifying a
      referent indirectly associated with this host.

3.2.4.   Result

   An example of a  result:

   
     dbarton
     IANA Manager
     Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
     res-dom@iana.org
     
       
4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
Marina del Rey CA 92092 US
+1.3108239358
The element represents an instance of a contact registration. The children of the element are as follows: o -- a registry unique assigned identifier for this contact. o -- the name of the contact. o -- a specification of the language code to use to localize the data in this result. o -- contains one of the following child elements: , , , or . Each of these elements is a "contactTypeType" as defined in Section 3.2.1. Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 11] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 o -- contains the organization name of the contact. o -- contains an e-mail address for this contact. o -- contains an e-mail address within an internationalized domain name [14]. o -- contains a SIP URI for this contact. o -- contains children representing a postal address. has the following children: *
-- contains the street address for this contact. * -- contains the city for this contact. * -- contains the national region for this contact. * -- contains the postal code for this contact. * -- contains the country for this contact. This SHOULD be a two-letter country code compliant with ISO 3166 [11]. o -- contains a voice phone number for this contact. If it begins with a '+' (plus) character, it MUST be a number defined by E164 [13]. The format number defined in E164 [13] is RECOMMENDED. o -- contains a facsimile phone number for this contact. If it begins with a '+' (plus) character, it MUST be a number defined by E164 [13]. The format number defined in E164 [13] is RECOMMENDED. o -- contains the date and time when this contact was created. o -- contains the date and time when this contact was last modified. o -- contains the date and time when this data for this contact was last verified to be correct by the appropriate registration authority. o -- contains an entity reference specifying equivalents of this contact that have been translated into other languages. The referent MUST be results (Section 3.2.4). o -- contains an entity reference specifying a referent indirectly associated with this contact. Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 12] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 3.2.5. An example of a result: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority The result represents an entity capable of registering domains. The child element of contains an entity reference pointing to the entity "id" in the entity class "iris". The authority areas found in the referent MUST be domains for which a given registration authority has control. The child element contains the name of the registration authority. The registration authority type child elements , , and determine the role this registration authority plays in the process of registering domains. This element is intended to explain the various roles a registration authority may have in the authority areas pointed to by the element. A client MAY understand the relationship of a registration authority with respect to a domain by the placement of the reference in the domain (e.g., or ). The child elements each contain one domain name signifying the domains for which this registration authority may register sub- domains. 3.3. Generic Code Derivatives 3.3.1. Servers MAY use the error code when a query must be narrowed to yield a result set acceptable under the policies of the server operator. Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 13] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 3.3.2. The queries , , and support optional language tags that allow a client to suggest to a server the languages in which to scope the queries. If a client passes to the server a language that the server does not support, the server MAY use this error code to indicate that one of the languages is not supported. This element contains child elements named . Each of these child elements specifies a language not supported by the server. When a server returns this error, it MUST give the languages from the query which are not supported. 3.4. Support for The following types of entity classes are recognized by the query of IRIS for this registry: o host-name -- The fully qualified domain name of a nameserver. It yields a (Section 3.2.3) in the response. o host-handle -- The registry unique identifier given a nameserver. It yields a (Section 3.2.3) in the response. o domain-name -- The fully qualified name of a domain. This a domain name as specified by RFC 1035 [9]. It yields a (Section 3.2.2) in the response. o idn -- The fully qualified name of a domain in nameprep form (see RFC 3491 [15]). It yields a (Section 3.2.2) in the response. o domain-handle -- The registry unique identifier given a domain. It yields a (Section 3.2.2) in the response. o contact-handle -- The registry unique identifier given a contact. It yields a (Section 3.2.4) in the response. o ipv4-address -- The IPv4 address of a nameserver. It yields a (Section 3.2.3) in the response. o ipv6-address -- The IPv6 address of a nameserver. It yields a (Section 3.2.3) in the response. o registration-authority -- The name of a registration authority. It yields a (Section 3.2.5) in the response. Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 14] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 All names in these entity classes are case insensitive. 4. Formal XML Syntax This registry schema is specified in the XML Schema notation. The formal syntax presented here is a complete schema representation suitable for automated validation of an XML instance when combined with the formal schema syntax of IRIS. Domain registry schema derived from IRIS schema Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 16] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 18] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 19] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 21] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 31] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 34] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 35] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 Figure 5: dreg.xsd 5. BEEP Transport Compliance IRIS allows several extensions of the core capabilities. This section outlines extensions allowable by IRIS-BEEP [6]. 5.1. Message Pattern This registry type uses the default message pattern described in IRIS-BEEP [6]. 5.2. Server Authentication This registry type only uses the basic TLS server authentication method, as described in IRIS-BEEP [6]. 6. URI Resolution 6.1. Application Service Label The application service label associated with this registry type MUST be "DREG1". This is the abbreviated form of the URN for this registry type: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:dreg1. Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 36] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 6.2. Bottom-Up Resolution The bottom-up alternative resolution method MUST be identified as 'bottom' in IRIS URI's. The process for this resolution method differs from the direct- resolution method if the authority is only a domain name (i.e., without the port number). The process for this condition is as follows: 1. The IRIS [5] direct-resolution process is tried on the domain name (e.g., "example.com"). 2. If the direct-resolution process yields no server for which a connection can be made, then the leftmost label of the domain name is removed, and the first step is repeated again (e.g., "com"). 3. If all the labels of the domain name are removed and no server connections have been made, then the DNS is queried for the address records corresponding to the original domain name, and the port used is the well-known port for the default protocol of IRIS. 6.3. Top-Down Resolution The top-down alternative resolution method MUST be identified as 'top' in IRIS URIs. The process for this resolution method differs from the direct- resolution method if the authority is only a domain name (i.e., without the port number). The process for this condition is as follows: 1. The domain name is reduced to its rightmost label. This is always '.'. 2. The IRIS [5] direct-resolution process is tried on the domain name. 3. If the direct-resolution process yields no server for which a connection can be made, then the original label to the left of the rightmost label of the domain name is prepended, and the second step is repeated again (e.g., if ".", then "com"; if "com", then "example.com"). 4. If all the labels of the original domain are present and no server connections have been made, then the DNS is queried for the address records corresponding to the original domain name, and the port used is the well-known port for the default protocol of IRIS. Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 37] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 7. Internationalization Considerations Implementers should be aware of considerations for internationalization in IRIS [5]. This document specifies the lookup of domain names, both the traditional ASCII form and the IDN form. In addition, the social data associated with contacts may also be non-ASCII and could contain virtually any Unicode character. The element is provided in queries that have the potential to traverse such data. Clients should use this element to indicate the desired target languages to the server, and servers should use this element to better enable normalization and search processes (see [18]). For clients needing to localize the data tags in this protocol, note that localization is only needed on the names of XML elements and attributes with the exception of elements containing date and time information. The schema for this registry has been designed so that clients need not interpret the content of elements or attributes for localization, other than that of elements containing date and time information. Clients should also make use of the elements provided in many of the results. Results containing data that may be in Unicode are accompanied by these elements in order to aid better presentation of the data to the user. The "dateTimePrivacyType" element type contains the XML Schema [3] data type "dateTime". The contents of this element MUST be specified by using the 'Z' indicator for Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). 8. IANA Considerations 8.1. XML Namespace URN Registration This document makes use of a proposed XML namespace and schema registry specified in XML_URN [16]. Accordingly, the following registration information is provided for the IANA: o URN/URI: * urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:dreg1 o Contact: * Andrew Newton * Marcos Sanz o XML: * The XML Schema specified in Section 4 Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 38] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 8.2. S-NAPTR Registration The following S-NAPTR application service label has been registered with IANA according to the IANA considerations defined in IRIS [5]: DREG1 8.3. BEEP Registration The following BEEP Profile URI has been registered with IANA, in addition to the registration provided in IRIS-BEEP [6]. http://iana.org/beep/iris1/dreg1 9. Security Considerations This document lays out no new considerations for security precautions beyond that specified in IRIS [5]. 10. References 10.1. Normative References [1] World Wide Web Consortium, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0", W3C XML, February 1998, . [2] World Wide Web Consortium, "Namespaces in XML", W3C XML Namespaces, January 1999, . [3] World Wide Web Consortium, "XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes", W3C XML Schema, October 2000, . [4] World Wide Web Consortium, "XML Schema Part 1: Structures", W3C XML Schema, October 2000, . [5] Newton, A. and M. Sanz, "IRIS: The Internet Registry Information Service (IRIS) Core Protocol", RFC 3981, December 2005. [6] Newton, A. and M. Sanz, "Using the Internet Registry Information Service (IRIS) over the Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol (BEEP)", RFC 3983, December 2005. Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 39] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 [7] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Addressing Architecture", RFC 3513, April 2003. [8] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791, September 1981. [9] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. [10] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [11] International Organization for Standardization, "Codes for the representation of names of countries, 3rd edition", ISO Standard 3166, August 1988. [12] Braden, R., "Requirements for Internet Hosts - Application and Support", STD 3, RFC 1123, October 1989. [13] International Telecommunications Union, "The International Public Telecommunication Numbering Plan", ITU-T Recommendation E.164, 1991. [14] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello, "Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)", RFC 3490, March 2003. [15] Hoffman, P. and M. Blanchet, "Nameprep: A Stringprep Profile for Internationalized Domain Names (IDN)", RFC 3491, March 2003. [16] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, January 2004. 10.2. Informative References [17] Newton, A., "Cross Registry Internet Service Protocol (CRISP) Requirements", RFC 3707, February 2004. URIs [18] Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 40] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 Appendix A. Examples of Requests and Responses The examples in this section use the string "C:" to denote data sent by a client to a server and the string "S:" to denote data sent by a server to a client. A.1. Example 1 The following is an example of an entity lookup in a dreg1 registry for the domain-name of 'example.com'. The response shows the ability to specify data as being withheld because it is private. C: C: C: C: C: C: C: C: C: C: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: example.com S: tcs-com-1 S: S: S: S: Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 41] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: Figure 6: Example 1 A.2. Example 2 The following is an example of an entity lookup in a dreg1 registry for the contact-handle of 'mak21'. The response shows the ability to specify data as being withheld because it is private. C: C: C: C: C: C: C: C: C: C: S: Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 42] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: mak21 S: S: S: Mark Kosters S: S: S: S: VeriSign, Inc. S: S: S: markk@verisignlabs.com S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: Figure 7: Example 2 A.3. Example 3 The following is an example of a domain search based on a registrant's name beginning with the string 'The Cobbler Shoppe'. This example also shows the use of bags. C: C: C: C: C: C: C: com Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 43] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 C: C: C: The Cobbler Shoppe C: C: C: registrant C: C: C: C: C: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: example.com S: S: S: S: S: Bill Eckels S: S: S: S: S: Mark Kosters Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 44] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: beb140 S: S: Bill Eckels S: S: en S: S: S: S: Bill sells shoes down by the sea shore. S: S: S: Rechnung verkauft Schuhe unten durch das Seeufer. S: S: S: S: S: The Cobbler Shoppe S: S: S: S:
S: 21 North Main Street S:
S: S: Britt Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 45] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 S: S: S: IA S: S: S: 50423 S: S: S: US S: S:
S: S: +1.5158433521 S: S:
S: S: S: It is illegal to use information from this service S: for the purposes of sending unsolicited bulk email. S: S: S:
S:
S: S: S: S: AAAAB3NzaC1yc2EAAAABIwAAAIEA0ddD+W3Agl0Lel98G1r77fZ S: c3nBl8CHdkmKuVGUy/ijmvdO5QxuSlU0R4BoCLZk/Sob22RApTn S: T+ROMbXFQBrxGH08daAOy98WqpfAutWJri61JLpubIbaqhGyB48 S: Qt69V6OhYfFsJjvoNEOh1k2dgzXhSlzP3OMVSKRlBzGcO8= S: S: S: S: S:
Figure 8: Example 3 Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 46] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 Appendix B. An Example of Database Serialization The following is an example of serializing domain data. This example shows the serialization of a domain, a host, and a referral. example.com IANA Administrator nsol184 ns1.iana.org 192.0.2.1 IANA Techie com Figure 9: dreg-serialization.xml Appendix C. Acknowledgements Many of the concepts concerning the use of SRV records for step-wise refinement toward finding authoritative servers and many of the details of result objects in this document were originally created by Eric A. Hall in his memos regarding the use of LDAP to satisfy the CRISP requirements. These concepts have contributed significantly to the development of this protocol. David Blacka made many technical contributions based on his work on IRIS implementation and his experienced judgment. He also contributed many editorial clarifications. Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 48] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 Authors' Addresses Andrew L. Newton VeriSign, Inc. 21345 Ridgetop Circle Sterling, VA 20166 USA Phone: +1 703 948 3382 EMail: anewton@verisignlabs.com; andy@hxr.us URI: http://www.verisignlabs.com/ Marcos Sanz DENIC eG Wiesenhuettenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt Germany EMail: sanz@denic.de URI: http://www.denic.de/ Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 49] RFC 3982 IRIS-Dreg January 2005 Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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. Intellectual Property The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights 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; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the IETF's procedures with respect to rights in IETF Documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat 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 implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf- ipr@ietf.org. Acknowledgement Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society. Newton & Sanz Standards Track [Page 50]