A. Submission Date: 2016-02-14

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: Wolfgang Riedel       Email Address: wolfgang&cisco.com
   International telephone number: +49-811-559-5450
   Other contact handles: 

D. Motivation for the new RRTYPE application.

   Cisco has developed a new use case for DNS called "DNS Authoritative Source" 
   in short DNS-AS. This use case uses the DNS to store and provide 
   metadata about applications.
   This data is primarily intended to be used for metadata driven 
   Application Visibility and Control in short AVC.
   
   On network elements it can be used as a key to link application to policy 
   in support of those applications as also for visualization afterwards.
   For example, a network element might use the information
   obtained through the AVC RRTYPE to set QoS or access policies for
   traffic to or from a specific application. 
   We are applying for a new RRTYPE that can hold the application metadata been 
   used by the DNS-AS use case for for AVC.

E. Description of the proposed RR type.

   General AVC Resource Record syntax:
   "<option>:<val>{|<option>:<val>}*" 
   
   The RDATA has exactly the same content as a TXT record.
   The option field is derived from RFC6759 Metadata Components long name.
   We try to keep the RR short to not exceed the 255 characters as also make it
   easy parseable. Therefore we shorten the RFC6759 names inside the RR like 
   "Application Name" to "app-name" or "Application ID" to "app-id"
   In case a single record might exceed 255 characters we need to allow for that, too.
   Typically an application would concatenate the individual sub-strings directly
   *without* adding any separator.

   An example for such an AVC RDATA record with app metadata would be:
   "app-name:WOLFGANG|app-class:OAM|business=yes" 

   See here for more info:
   http://www.dns-as.org/what-is/metadata/
   http://www.dns-as.org/support/dns-as-rr/

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

   Like SPF we are currently using the TXT RR for DNS-AS. The TXT RRTYPE 
   can support arbitrary TLVs encoded as a text. In general this kind 
   of (ab)use of TXT RR is discouraged as discussed in RFC5507 therefore
   we apply for a dedicated resource record.

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

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.

   The mnemonic syntax as also the potential <option>:<val> fields are
   inline with RFC6759 and the usage is described in detail here:
   http://www.dns-as.org/what-is/metadata/
   http://www.dns-as.org/support/avc-rdata/

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.

J. Comments:

   None.