RFC 8324: DNS Privacy, Authorization, Special Uses, Encoding, Characters, Matching, and Root Structure: Time for Another Look?
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
The basic design of the Domain Name System was completed almost 30 years ago. The last half of that period has been characterized by significant changes in requirements and expectations, some of which either require changes to how the DNS is used or can be accommodated only poorly or not at all. This document asks the question of whether it is time to either redesign and replace the DNS to match contemporary requirements and expectations (rather than continuing to try to design and implement incremental patches that are not fully satisfactory) or draw some clear lines about functionality that is not really needed or that should be performed in some other way.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC8324
- Published
- February 2018
- Authors
- J. Klensin
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- INDEPENDENT
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 29
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 9022Domain Name Registration Data (DNRD) Objects MappingCurrent
May 2021
- RFC 6891Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS(0))Current
April 2013
- RFC 6604xNAME RCODE and Status Bits ClarificationCurrent
April 2012
- RFC 5731Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Domain Name MappingCurrent
August 2009
- RFC 2901Guide to Administrative Procedures of the Internet InfrastructureCurrent
August 2000
- RFC 2826IAB Technical Comment on the Unique DNS RootCurrent
May 2000
- RFC 2694DNS extensions to Network Address Translators (DNS_ALG)Current
September 1999
- RFC 1401Correspondence between the IAB and DISA on the use of DNSCurrent
January 1993
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?