<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc [
  <!ENTITY nbsp    "&#160;">
  <!ENTITY zwsp   "&#8203;">
  <!ENTITY nbhy   "&#8209;">
  <!ENTITY wj     "&#8288;">
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="rfc2629.xslt" ?>
<!-- generated by https://github.com/cabo/kramdown-rfc2629 version 1.5.21 -->
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-rebs-dnsop-svcb-dane-00" category="std" consensus="true" updates="rfc6698" tocInclude="true" sortRefs="true" symRefs="true" obsoletes="" submissionType="IETF" xml:lang="en" version="3">
  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 3.11.1 -->
  <front>
    <title abbrev="SVCB-DANE">Using Service Bindings with DANE</title>
    <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-rebs-dnsop-svcb-dane-00"/>
    <author initials="B.M." surname="Schwartz" fullname="Benjamin M. Schwartz">
      <organization>Google LLC</organization>
      <address>
        <email>bemasc@google.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="R." surname="Evans" fullname="Robert Evans">
      <organization>Google LLC</organization>
      <address>
        <email>evansr@google.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date year="2021" month="December" day="09"/>
    <area>ops</area>
    <workgroup>dnsop</workgroup>
    <keyword>Internet-Draft</keyword>
    <abstract>
      <t>Service Binding records introduce a new form of name indirection in DNS. This document specifies DNS-Based Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) interaction with Service Bindings to secure endpoints including use of ports and transports discovered via Service Parameters.</t>
    </abstract>
    <note removeInRFC="true">
      <name>Discussion Venues</name>
      <t>Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
    <eref target="https://github.com/bemasc/svcb-dane"/>.</t>
    </note>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <section anchor="introduction" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Introduction</name>
      <t>The DNS-Based Authentication of Named Entities specification <xref target="RFC7671" format="default"/> explains how clients locate the TLSA record for a service of interest, starting with knowledge of the service's hostname, transport, and port number.  These are concatenated, forming a name like _8080._tcp.example.com.  It also specifies how clients should locate the TLSA record when one or more CNAME records are present, aliasing either the hostname or the TLSA record's name, and the resulting server names used in TLS.</t>
      <t>There are various DNS records other than CNAME that add indirection to the host resolution process, requiring similar specifications.  Thus, <xref target="RFC7672" format="default"/> describes how DANE interacts with MX records, and <xref target="RFC7673" format="default"/> describes its interaction with SRV records.</t>
      <t>This draft describes the interaction of DANE with indirection via Service Bindings <xref target="SVCB" format="default"/>, i.e. SVCB-compatible records such as SVCB and HTTPS.  It also explains how to use DANE with new TLS-based transports such as QUIC.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="conventions-and-definitions" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Conventions and Definitions</name>
      <t>The key words "<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>REQUIRED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL
NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>NOT RECOMMENDED</bcp14>",
"<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>", and "<bcp14>OPTIONAL</bcp14>" in this document are to be interpreted as
described in BCP 14 <xref target="RFC2119" format="default"/> <xref target="RFC8174" format="default"/> when, and only when, they
appear in all capitals, as shown here.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="using-dane-with-service-bindings" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Using DANE with Service Bindings</name>
      <t><xref section="6" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC7671" format="default"/> says:</t>
      <ul empty="true">
        <li>
          <t>With protocols that support explicit transport redirection via DNS MX records, SRV records, or other similar records, the TLSA base domain is based on the redirected transport endpoint rather than the origin domain.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <t>This draft applies the same logic to SVCB-compatible records.  Specifically, if SVCB resolution was entirely secure (including any AliasMode records and/or CNAMEs), then for each connection attempt derived from a SVCB-compatible record,</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>The initial TLSA base domain <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be the final SVCB TargetName used for this connection attempt.  (Names appearing earlier in a resolution chain are not used.)</li>
        <li>The transport prefix <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be the transport of this connection attempt (possibly influenced by the "alpn" SvcParam).</li>
        <li>The port prefix <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be the port number of this connection attempt (possibly influenced by the "port" SvcParam).</li>
      </ul>
      <t>If the SVCB TargetName contains a CNAME record, clients <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> first try to use the CNAME target as the TLSA base domain, with fallback to the final SVCB TargetName as the TLSA base domain, as described in <xref section="7" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC7671" format="default"/>.</t>
      <t>If any TLSA QNAME is aliased by a CNAME, clients <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> follow the TLSA CNAME to complete the resolution of the TLSA record.  (This does not alter the TLSA base domain.)</t>
      <t>If a TLSA RRSet is securely resolved, the client <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> set the SNI to the TLSA base domain of the RRSet.  In usage modes other than DANE-EE(3), the client <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> validate that the certificate covers this base domain, and <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> require it to cover any other domain.</t>
      <t>If the client has SVCB-optional behavior (as defined in <xref section="3" sectionFormat="of" target="SVCB" format="default"/>), it <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> use the standard DANE logic described in <xref section="4.1" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC6698" format="default"/> when falling back to non-SVCB connection.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="protocols" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Updating the TLSA protocol prefixes</name>
      <t><xref section="3" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC6698" format="default"/> defined the protocol prefix used for constructing TLSA QNAMEs, and said:</t>
      <ul empty="true">
        <li>
          <t>The transport names defined for this protocol are "tcp", "udp", and "sctp".</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <t>At that time, there was exactly one TLS-based protocol defined for each of these transports.  However, with the introduction of QUIC <xref target="RFC9000" format="default"/>, there are now multiple TLS-derived protocols that can operate over UDP, even on the same port.  To distinguish the availability and configuration of DTLS and QUIC, this draft Updates the above sentence as follows:</t>
      <ul empty="true">
        <li>
          <t>The transport names defined for this protocol are "tcp" (TLS over TCP <xref target="RFC8446" format="default"/>), "udp" (DTLS <xref target="I-D.draft-ietf-tls-dtls13" format="default"/>), "sctp" (TLS over SCTP <xref target="RFC3436" format="default"/>), and "quic" (QUIC <xref target="RFC9000" format="default"/>).</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
    </section>
    <section anchor="operational-considerations" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Operational considerations</name>
      <section anchor="recommended-configurations" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>Recommended configurations</name>
        <t>Service consumers are expected to use CNAME or SVCB AliasMode to point at provider-controlled records, e.g.:</t>
        <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[
alias.net.                  HTTPS 0 xyz.provider.com.
www.alias.net.              CNAME xyz.provider.com.
xyz.provider.com.           HTTPS 1 . alpn=h2 ...
xyz.provider.com.           A     192.0.2.1
_443._tcp.xyz.provider.com. TLSA  <provider keys>
]]></artwork>
        <t>For ease of management, providers may want to alias various TLSA QNAMEs to a single RRSet:</t>
        <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[
_443._tcp.xyz.provider.com. CNAME dane-central.provider.com.
dane-central.provider.com.  TLSA  <provider keys>
]]></artwork>
      </section>
      <section anchor="accidental-pinning" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>Accidental pinning</name>
        <t>When a service is used by third-party consumers, DANE allows the consumer to publish records that make claims about the certificates used by the service.  When the service subsequently rotates its TLS keys, DANE authentication will fail for these consumers, resulting in an outage.  Accordingly, zone owners <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> publish TLSA records for public keys that are not under their control unless they have an explicit arrangement with the key holder.</t>
        <t>To prevents the above misconfiguration and ensure that TLS keys can be rotated freely, service operators <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> reject TLS connections whose SNI does not correspond to an approved TLSA base domain.</t>
        <t>Service Bindings also enable any third party consumer to publish fixed SvcParams for the service.  This can cause an outage or service degradation if the service makes a backward-incompatible configuration change.  Accordingly, zone owners <bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14> publish SvcParams for a TargetName that they do not control, and service operators should take caution when making incompatible configuration changes.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="security-considerations" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Security Considerations</name>
      <t>This document specifies the use of TLSA as a property of each connection attempt.  In environments where DANE is optional, this means that the fallback procedure might use DANE for some conection attempts but not others.</t>
      <t>This document only specifies the use of TLSA records when the SVCB records were resolved securely.  Use of TLSA records in conjunction with insecurely resolved SVCB records is not safe in general, although there may be some configurations where it is appropriate (e.g. when only opportunistic security is available).</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="examples" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Examples</name>
      <t>The following examples demonstrate Serving Binding interaction with TLSA base domain selection.</t>
      <t>All of the RRSets below are assumed fully-secure with all related DNSSEC record types omitted for brevity.</t>
      <section anchor="https-servicemode" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>HTTPS ServiceMode</name>
        <t>Given service URI <tt>https://api.example.com</tt> and record:</t>
        <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[
api.example.com. HTTPS 1 .
]]></artwork>
        <t>The TLSA QNAME is <tt>_443._tcp.api.example.com</tt>.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="https-aliasmode" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>HTTPS AliasMode</name>
        <t>Given service URI <tt>https://api.example.com</tt> and records:</t>
        <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[
api.example.com.     HTTPS 0 svc4.example.net.
svc4.example.net.    HTTPS 0 xyz.example-cdn.com.
xyz.example-cdn.com. A     192.0.2.1
]]></artwork>
        <t>The TLSA QNAME is <tt>_443._tcp.xyz.example-cdn.com</tt>.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="quic-and-cname" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>QUIC and CNAME</name>
        <t>Given service URI <tt>https://api.example.com</tt> and records:</t>
        <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[
www.example.com.  CNAME api.example.com.
api.example.com.  HTTPS 1 svc4.example.net alpn=h2,h3 port=8443
svc4.example.net. CNAME xyz.example-cdn.com.
]]></artwork>
        <t>If the connection attempt is using HTTP/3, the transport label is set to <tt>_quic</tt>\; otherwise <tt>_tcp</tt> is used.</t>
        <t>The initial TLSA QNAME would be one of:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            <tt>_8443._quic.svc4.example.net</tt></li>
          <li>
            <tt>_8443._tcp.svc4.example.net</tt></li>
        </ul>
        <t>If no TLSA record is found, the fallback TLSA QNAME would be one of:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            <tt>_8443._quic.xyz.example-cdn.com</tt></li>
          <li>
            <tt>_8443._tcp.xyz.example-cdn.com</tt></li>
        </ul>
      </section>
      <section anchor="new-scheme-servicemode" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>New scheme ServiceMode</name>
        <t>Given service URI <tt>foo://api.example.com:8443</tt> and record:</t>
        <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[
_8443._foo.api.example.com. SVCB 1 api.example.com.
]]></artwork>
        <t>The TLSA QNAME is <tt>_8443._$PROTO.api.example.com</tt>, where $PROTO is the appropriate value for the client-selected transport as discussed in <xref target="protocols" format="default"/> .</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="new-scheme-aliasmode" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>New scheme AliasMode</name>
        <t>Given service URI <tt>foo://api.example.com:8443</tt> and records:</t>
        <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[
_8443._foo.api.example.com. SVCB 0 svc4.example.net.
svc4.example.net.           SVCB 1 .
svc4.example.net.           A    192.0.2.1
]]></artwork>
        <t>The TLSA QNAME is <tt>_8443._$PROTO.svc4.example.net</tt> (with $PROTO as above).  This is the same if the ServiceMode record is absent.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="new-protocols" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>New protocols</name>
        <t>Given service URI <tt>foo://api.example.com:8443</tt> and records:</t>
        <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[
_8443._foo.api.example.com. SVCB 0 svc4.example.net.
svc4.example.net. SVCB 3 . alpn=foo,bar port=8004
]]></artwork>
        <t>The TLSA QNAME is <tt>_8004._$PROTO1.svc4.example.net</tt> or <tt>_8004._$PROTO2.svc4.example.net</tt>, where $PROTO1 and $PROTO2 are the transport prefixes appropriate for "foo" and "bar" respectively.  (Note that SVCB requires each ALPN to unambiguously indicate a transport.)</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="dns-servicemode" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>DNS ServiceMode</name>
        <t>Given a DNS server <tt>dns.example.com</tt> and record:</t>
        <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[
_dns.dns.example.com. SVCB 1 dns.example.com. alpn=dot
]]></artwork>
        <t>The TLSA QNAME is <tt>_853._tcp.dns.example.com</tt>.  The TLSA base name is taken from the SVCB TargetName.  The port and protocol are taken from the "dot" ALPN value.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="dns-aliasmode" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>DNS AliasMode</name>
        <t>Given a DNS server <tt>dns.example.com</tt> and records:</t>
        <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[
_dns.dns.example.com. SVCB 0 dns.my-dns-host.net.
dns.my-dns-host.net.  SVCB 1 . alpn=dot
]]></artwork>
        <t>The TLSA QNAME is <tt>_853._tcp.ns1.my-dns-host.net</tt>.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="iana-considerations" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <t>IANA is instructed to add the following entry to the "Underscored and Globally Scoped DNS Node Names" registry:</t>
      <table align="center">
        <thead>
          <tr>
            <th align="left">RR Type</th>
            <th align="left">_NODE NAME</th>
            <th align="left">Reference</th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">TLSA</td>
            <td align="left">_quic</td>
            <td align="left">(This document)</td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <back>
    <references>
      <name>References</name>
      <references>
        <name>Normative References</name>
        <reference anchor="RFC7671">
          <front>
            <title>The DNS-Based Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) Protocol: Updates and Operational Guidance</title>
            <author fullname="V. Dukhovni" initials="V." surname="Dukhovni">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <author fullname="W. Hardaker" initials="W." surname="Hardaker">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <date month="October" year="2015"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document clarifies and updates the DNS-Based Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) TLSA specification (RFC 6698), based on subsequent implementation experience.  It also contains guidance for implementers, operators, and protocol developers who want to use DANE records.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7671"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7671"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="SVCB">
          <front>
            <title>Service binding and parameter specification via the DNS (DNS SVCB and HTTPS RRs)</title>
            <author fullname="Ben Schwartz">
              <organization>Google</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Mike Bishop">
              <organization>Akamai Technologies</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Erik Nygren">
              <organization>Akamai Technologies</organization>
            </author>
            <date day="12" month="October" year="2021"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>   This document specifies the "SVCB" and "HTTPS" DNS resource record
   (RR) types to facilitate the lookup of information needed to make
   connections to network services, such as for HTTP origins.  SVCB
   records allow a service to be provided from multiple alternative
   endpoints, each with associated parameters (such as transport
   protocol configuration and keys for encrypting the TLS ClientHello).
   They also enable aliasing of apex domains, which is not possible with
   CNAME.  The HTTPS RR is a variation of SVCB for use with HTTP [HTTP].
   By providing more information to the client before it attempts to
   establish a connection, these records offer potential benefits to
   both performance and privacy.

   TO BE REMOVED: This document is being collaborated on in Github at:
   https://github.com/MikeBishop/dns-alt-svc
   (https://github.com/MikeBishop/dns-alt-svc).  The most recent working
   version of the document, open issues, etc. should all be available
   there.  The authors (gratefully) accept pull requests.

              </t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-https-08"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC2119">
          <front>
            <title>Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
            <author fullname="S. Bradner" initials="S." surname="Bradner">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <date month="March" year="1997"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification.  These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents.  This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2119"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2119"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8174">
          <front>
            <title>Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words</title>
            <author fullname="B. Leiba" initials="B." surname="Leiba">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <date month="May" year="2017"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol  specifications.  This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the  defined special meanings.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8174"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8174"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC6698">
          <front>
            <title>The DNS-Based Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol: TLSA</title>
            <author fullname="P. Hoffman" initials="P." surname="Hoffman">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <author fullname="J. Schlyter" initials="J." surname="Schlyter">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <date month="August" year="2012"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Encrypted communication on the Internet often uses Transport Layer Security (TLS), which depends on third parties to certify the keys used.  This document improves on that situation by enabling the administrators of domain names to specify the keys used in that domain's TLS servers.  This requires matching improvements in TLS client software, but no change in TLS server software.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6698"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6698"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC9000">
          <front>
            <title>QUIC: A UDP-Based Multiplexed and Secure Transport</title>
            <author fullname="J. Iyengar" initials="J." role="editor" surname="Iyengar">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <author fullname="M. Thomson" initials="M." role="editor" surname="Thomson">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <date month="May" year="2021"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document defines the core of the QUIC transport protocol.  QUIC provides applications with flow-controlled streams for structured communication, low-latency connection establishment, and network path migration. QUIC includes security measures that ensure confidentiality, integrity, and availability in a range of deployment circumstances.  Accompanying documents describe the integration of TLS for key negotiation, loss detection, and an exemplary congestion control algorithm.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9000"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9000"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8446">
          <front>
            <title>The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.3</title>
            <author fullname="E. Rescorla" initials="E." surname="Rescorla">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <date month="August" year="2018"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document specifies version 1.3 of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol.  TLS allows client/server applications to communicate over the Internet in a way that is designed to prevent eavesdropping, tampering, and message forgery.</t>
              <t>This document updates RFCs 5705 and 6066, and obsoletes RFCs 5077, 5246, and 6961.  This document also specifies new requirements for TLS 1.2 implementations.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8446"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8446"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="I-D.draft-ietf-tls-dtls13">
          <front>
            <title>The Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) Protocol Version 1.3</title>
            <author fullname="Eric Rescorla">
              <organization>RTFM, Inc.</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Hannes Tschofenig">
              <organization>Arm Limited</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Nagendra Modadugu">
              <organization>Google, Inc.</organization>
            </author>
            <date day="30" month="April" year="2021"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>   This document specifies Version 1.3 of the Datagram Transport Layer
   Security (DTLS) protocol.  DTLS 1.3 allows client/server applications
   to communicate over the Internet in a way that is designed to prevent
   eavesdropping, tampering, and message forgery.

   The DTLS 1.3 protocol is intentionally based on the Transport Layer
   Security (TLS) 1.3 protocol and provides equivalent security
   guarantees with the exception of order protection/non-replayability.
   Datagram semantics of the underlying transport are preserved by the
   DTLS protocol.

   This document obsoletes RFC 6347.

              </t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-tls-dtls13-43"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC3436">
          <front>
            <title>Transport Layer Security over Stream Control Transmission Protocol</title>
            <author fullname="A. Jungmaier" initials="A." surname="Jungmaier">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <author fullname="E. Rescorla" initials="E." surname="Rescorla">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <author fullname="M. Tuexen" initials="M." surname="Tuexen">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <date month="December" year="2002"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes the usage of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol, as defined in RFC 2246, over the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP), as defined in RFC 2960 and RFC 3309. The user of TLS can take advantage of the features provided by SCTP, namely the support of multiple streams to avoid head of line blocking and the support of multi-homing to provide network level fault tolerance. Additionally, discussions of extensions of SCTP are also supported, meaning especially the support of dynamic reconfiguration of IP- addresses.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3436"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3436"/>
        </reference>
      </references>
      <references>
        <name>Informative References</name>
        <reference anchor="RFC7672">
          <front>
            <title>SMTP Security via Opportunistic DNS-Based Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) Transport Layer Security (TLS)</title>
            <author fullname="V. Dukhovni" initials="V." surname="Dukhovni">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <author fullname="W. Hardaker" initials="W." surname="Hardaker">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <date month="October" year="2015"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This memo describes a downgrade-resistant protocol for SMTP transport security between Message Transfer Agents (MTAs), based on the DNS-Based Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) TLSA DNS record. Adoption of this protocol enables an incremental transition of the Internet email backbone to one using encrypted and authenticated Transport Layer Security (TLS).</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7672"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7672"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC7673">
          <front>
            <title>Using DNS-Based Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) TLSA Records with SRV Records</title>
            <author fullname="T. Finch" initials="T." surname="Finch">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <author fullname="M. Miller" initials="M." surname="Miller">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <author fullname="P. Saint-Andre" initials="P." surname="Saint-Andre">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <date month="October" year="2015"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>The DNS-Based Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) specification (RFC 6698) describes how to use TLSA resource records secured by DNSSEC (RFC 4033) to associate a server's connection endpoint with its Transport Layer Security (TLS) certificate (thus enabling administrators of domain names to specify the keys used in that domain's TLS servers).  However, application protocols that use SRV records (RFC 2782) to indirectly name the target server connection endpoints for a service domain name cannot apply the rules from RFC 6698.  Therefore, this document provides guidelines that enable such protocols to locate and use TLSA records.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7673"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7673"/>
        </reference>
      </references>
    </references>
    <section numbered="false" anchor="acknowledgments" toc="default">
      <name>Acknowledgments</name>
      <t>TODO acknowledge.</t>
    </section>
  </back>
  <!-- ##markdown-source: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-->

</rfc>
