RFC 2915:The Naming Authority Pointer (NAPTR) DNS ...
RFC-Ref

1. Introduction

This RR was originally produced by the URN Working Group [3] as a way to encode rule-sets in DNS so that the delegated sections of a URI could be decomposed in such a way that they could be changed and re- delegated over time. The result was a Resource Record that included a regular expression that would be used by a client program to rewrite a string into a domain name. Regular expressions were chosen for their compactness to expressivity ratio allowing for a great deal of information to be encoded in a rather small DNS packet.

The function of rewriting a string according to the rules in a record has usefulness in several different applications. This document defines the basic assumptions to which all of those applications must adhere to. It does not define the reasons the rewrite is used, what the expected outcomes are, or what they are used for. Those are specified by applications that define how they use the NAPTR record and algorithms within their contexts.

Flags and other fields are also specified in the RR to control the rewrite procedure in various ways or to provide information on how to communicate with the host at the domain name that was the result of the rewrite.

The final result is a RR that has several fields that interact in a non-trivial but implementable way. This document specifies those fields and their values.

This document does not define applications that utilizes this rewrite functionality. Instead it specifies just the mechanics of how it is done. Why its done, what the rules concerning the inputs, and the types of rules used are reserved for other documents that fully specify a particular application. This separation is due to several different applications all wanting to take advantage of the rewrite rule lookup process. Each one has vastly different reasons for why and how it uses the service, thus requiring that the definition of the service be generic.

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 RFC 2119.

All references to Uniform Resource Identifiers in this document adhere to the 'absoluteURI' production of the "Collected ABNF" found in RFC 2396(-> 3986std66) [9]. Specifically, the semantics of URI References do not apply since the concept of a Base makes no sense here.


Google
Web
RFC-Ref