A. Submission Date: 2024-12-09

B.1 Submission Type: [x] New RRTYPE [ ] Modification to RRTYPE
B.2 Kind of RR: [x] Data RR [ ] Meta-RR

C. Contact Information for submitter (will be publicly posted):
Name: Peter Thomassen Email Address: peter&desec.io
International telephone number: +4917663159879
Other contact handles:

D. Motivation for the new RRTYPE application.
Please keep this part at a high level to inform the Expert and
reviewers about uses of the RRTYPE. Most reviewers will be DNS
experts that may have limited knowledge of your application space.

For use with https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-generalized-notify/.
The draft specifies a way for a child DNS operator to send a
notification when publishing a new record that relates to managing
the child's delegation (such as, for DS updates), so that the
notification recipient (parent) can perform appropriate actions.
The DSYNC record is supposed to tell the child DNS operator where
to send such notifications, and which targets pertain to what kinds
of updates.

E. Description of the proposed RR type.
This description can be provided in-line in the template, as an
attachment, or with a publicly available URL.

DSYNC provides a scheme, a target hostname and port, and another
RRtype (such as CDS). For details, see
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-dnsop-generalized-notify-03.html#name-dsync-rr-type

F. What existing RRTYPE or RRTYPEs come closest to filling that need
and why are they unsatisfactory?

SRV / SVCB are similar, but they do not provide a field for encoding
the RRtype of the desired update (e.g., CDS). A workaround would be
to encode that in the owner name, but the DNSOP WG preferred a new
record type.For a discussion, see
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-dnsop-generalized-notify-02.html#name-rationale

G. What mnemonic is requested for the new RRTYPE (optional)?

Note: If a mnemonic is not supplied, not allowed, or duplicates an
existing RRTYPE or CLASS mnemonic, the Expert will assign a
mnemonic.

DSYNC

H. Does the requested RRTYPE make use of any existing IANA registry
or require the creation of a new IANA subregistry in DNS
Parameters? If so, please indicate which registry is to be used
or created. If a new subregistry is needed, specify the
allocation policy for it and its initial contents. Also include
what the modification procedures will be.

From https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-dnsop-generalized-notify-03.html#name-dsync-scheme-registration:

IANA is requested to create a new registry on the
"Domain Name System (DNS) Parameters" IANA web page as follows:

Name DSYNC: Location of Synchronization Endpoints

Assignment Policy Expert Review

Reference (this document)

+========+=========+========================+=================+
| RRtype | Scheme | Purpose | Reference |
+========+=========+========================+=================+
| | 0 | Null scheme (no-op) | (this document) |
+--------+---------+------------------------+-----------------+
| CDS | 1 | Delegation management | (this document) |
+--------+---------+------------------------+-----------------+
| CSYNC | 1 | Delegation management | (this document) |
+--------+---------+------------------------+-----------------+
| | 2-127 | Unassigned | |
+--------+---------+------------------------+-----------------+
| | 128-255 | Reserved (private use) | (this document) |
+--------+---------+------------------------+-----------------+


I. Does the proposal require/expect any changes in DNS
servers/resolvers that prevent the new type from being processed
as an unknown RRTYPE (see [RFC3597])?

No.