You cannot select more than 25 topics
Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
127 lines
5.3 KiB
Markdown
127 lines
5.3 KiB
Markdown
6 years ago
|
# .well-known support for server name resolution
|
||
|
|
||
|
Currently, mapping from a server name to a hostname for federation is done via
|
||
|
`SRV` records. This presents two principal difficulties:
|
||
|
|
||
|
* SRV records are not widely used, and administrators may be unfamiliar with
|
||
|
them, and there may be other practical difficulties in their deployment such
|
||
|
as poor support from hosting providers. [^1]
|
||
|
|
||
|
* It is likely that we will soon require valid X.509 certificates on the
|
||
|
federation endpoint. It will then be necessary for the homeserver to present
|
||
|
a certificate which is valid for the server name. This presents difficulties
|
||
|
for hosted server offerings: BigCorp may be reluctant to hand over the
|
||
|
keys for `bigcorp.com` to the administrators of the `bigcorp.com` matrix
|
||
|
homeserver.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Here we propose to solve these problems by augmenting the current `SRV` record
|
||
|
with a `.well-known` lookup.
|
||
|
|
||
|
## Proposal
|
||
|
|
||
|
For reference, the current [specification for resolving server
|
||
|
names](https://matrix.org/docs/spec/server_server/unstable.html#resolving-server-names)
|
||
|
is as follows:
|
||
|
|
||
|
* If the hostname is an IP literal, then that IP address should be used,
|
||
|
together with the given port number, or 8448 if no port is given.
|
||
|
|
||
|
* Otherwise, if the port is present, then an IP address is discovered by
|
||
|
looking up an AAAA or A record for the hostname, and the specified port is
|
||
|
used.
|
||
|
|
||
|
* If the hostname is not an IP literal and no port is given, the server is
|
||
|
discovered by first looking up a `_matrix._tcp` SRV record for the
|
||
|
hostname, which may give a hostname (to be looked up using AAAA or A queries)
|
||
|
and port. If the SRV record does not exist, then the server is discovered by
|
||
|
looking up an AAAA or A record on the hostname and taking the default
|
||
|
fallback port number of 8448.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Homeservers may use SRV records to load balance requests between multiple TLS
|
||
|
endpoints or to failover to another endpoint if an endpoint fails.
|
||
|
|
||
|
The first two points remain unchanged: if the server name is an IP literal, or
|
||
|
contains a port, then requests will be made directly as before.
|
||
|
|
||
|
If the hostname is neither an IP literal, nor does it have an explicit port,
|
||
|
then the requesting server should continue to make an SRV lookup as before, and
|
||
|
use the result if one is found.
|
||
|
|
||
|
If *no* result is found, the requesting server should make a `GET` request to
|
||
|
`https://\<server_name>/.well-known/matrix/server`, with normal X.509
|
||
|
certificate validation. If the request fails in any way, then we fall back as
|
||
|
before to using using port 8448 on the hostname.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Rationale: Falling back to port 8448 (rather than aborting the request) is
|
||
|
necessary to maintain compatibility with existing deployments, which may not
|
||
|
present valid certificates on port 443, or may return 4xx or 5xx errors.
|
||
|
|
||
|
If the GET request succeeds, it should result in a JSON response, with contents
|
||
|
structured as shown:
|
||
|
|
||
|
```json
|
||
|
{
|
||
|
"server": "<server>[:<port>]"
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
```
|
||
|
|
||
|
The `server` property has the same format as a [server
|
||
|
name](https://matrix.org/docs/spec/appendices.html#server-name): a hostname
|
||
|
followed by an optional port.
|
||
|
|
||
|
If the response cannot be parsed as JSON, or lacks a valid `server` property,
|
||
|
the request is considered to have failed, and no fallback to port 8448 takes
|
||
|
place.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Otherwise, the requesting server performs an `AAAA/A` lookup on the hostname,
|
||
|
and connects to the resultant address and the specifed port. The port defaults
|
||
|
to 8448, if unspecified.
|
||
|
|
||
|
### Caching
|
||
|
|
||
|
Servers should not look up the `.well-known` file for every request, as this
|
||
|
would impose an unacceptable overhead on both sides. Instead, the results of
|
||
|
the `.well-known` request should be cached according to the HTTP response
|
||
|
headers, as per [RFC7234](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7234). If the response
|
||
|
does not include an explicit expiry time, the requesting server should use a
|
||
|
sensible default: 24 hours is suggested.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Because there is no way to request a revalidation, it is also recommended that
|
||
|
requesting servers cap the expiry time. 48 hours is suggested.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Similarly, a failure to retrieve the `.well-known` file should be cached for
|
||
|
a reasonable period. 24 hours is suggested again.
|
||
|
|
||
|
### The future of SRV records
|
||
|
|
||
|
It's worth noting that this proposal is very clear in that we will maintain
|
||
|
support for SRV records for the immediate future; there are no current plans to
|
||
|
deprecate them.
|
||
|
|
||
|
However, clearly a `.well-known` file can provide much of the functionality of
|
||
|
an SRV record, and having to support both may be undesirable. Accordingly, we
|
||
|
may consider sunsetting SRV record support at some point in the future.
|
||
|
|
||
|
### Outstanding questions
|
||
|
|
||
|
Should we follow 30x redirects for the .well-known file? On the one hand, there
|
||
|
is no obvious usecase and they add complexity (for example: how do they
|
||
|
interact with caches?). On the other hand, we'll presumably be using an HTTP
|
||
|
client library to handle some of the caching stuff, and they might be useful
|
||
|
for something?
|
||
|
|
||
|
## Security considerations
|
||
|
|
||
|
The `.well-known` file potentially broadens the attack surface for an attacker
|
||
|
wishing to intercept federation traffic to a particular server.
|
||
|
|
||
|
## Conclusion
|
||
|
|
||
|
This proposal adds a new mechanism, alongside the existing `SRV` record lookup
|
||
|
for finding the server responsible for a particular matrix server_name, which
|
||
|
will allow greater flexibility in deploying homeservers.
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
[^1] For example, Cloudflare automatically "flattens" SRV record responses.
|
||
|
|