> On 13 Jan 2026, at 23:03, Andrea Ferro <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi DNDOP,
> 
> My name is Andrea Ferro. I recently submitted an I-D proposing a standardized 
> protocol for consumer Dynamic DNS services.
> 
> There is also an TXT version available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ferro-dnsop-apertodns-protocol-00.txt
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ferro-dnsop-apertodns-protocol/
> 
> There is also an HTML version available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ferro-dnsop-apertodns-protocol-00.html
> 
> The motivation is simple: consumer DDNS has been around for 25+ years 
> (ddclient, inadyn, countless routers and IoT devices), but there's never been 
> a formal specification. Everyone just reverse-engineered the dyndns2 protocol 
> and built their own variations. This has led to inconsistent implementations, 
> fragmented IPv6 support, and vendor lock-in.

So just promote RFC 2136.  These boxes already have DNS code in them.

It really isn’t hard to construct an UPDATE request.  RFC 2136 has been
used for decades now between DHCP servers and DNS servers but there is
no requirement that UPDATE requests be processed on a nameserver,
UPDATE requests are able to be forwarded.

RFC 2136 has also been used for decades with GSS-TSIG with Active
Directory.

All this seem to add is a built in "what is my IP address” service
and adding an EDNS option which says to replace 0.0.0.0 and :: with
the requester’s IP address would suffice to achieve the same thing.

Is there any real difference between a CPE box and everything else
that uses RFC 2136 today.  Is it just NIH coming into play?

If you really must use HTTPS then just encode the request as is done
for DoH.


> The draft proposes a RESTful alternative using well-known URIs (RFC 8615), 
> JSON, and bearer tokens. It's designed to be provider-agnostic - any DDNS 
> service can implement it.
> 
> I have a working implementation in production at apertodns.com, so this isn't 
> just theoretical.
> I'm looking for feedback on whether this is appropriate work for DNSOP, and 
> whether there's interest in adoption. Happy to present at a future session if 
> useful.
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Andrea Ferro
> [email protected]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742              INTERNET: [email protected]

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to