ZFW Controller voiced concern regarding holding pattern entry procedures that resulted in unauthorized R5601 entries.

Narrative

A B707 departed TIK AFB and climbed to FL250. The pilot requested to hold at the IRW223041 with one turn in holding and then proceed down track on AR112H. The aircraft was already cleared to the IRW223041 before I took RADAR control. I cleared the B717 to the IRW223041; hold east; no delay expected. There is a Restricted Area 5601 which was in use at the time to FL255 approximately 7 miles to the southwest of the intended holding fix. The B707 proceeded past the issued holding fix and I advised the pilot to remain clear of Restricted Area 5601. The pilot concurred that he would remain clear. To my knowledge; aircraft that are issued 'no delay expected' are not required to be issued holding instructions; however; the pilot should have entered an east holding pattern. Secondly; the pilot 'requested' one turn in holding; however; I did not approve any turn in holding; I advised the B707 to expect no delay. Finally; according to aerial refueling procedures; an aircraft that is not issued a further clearance should proceed down the aerial refueling track (refueling is not authorized). I believe the procedures issued to the aircraft were accurate and correct; however; my concern is that an aircraft issued holding instructions at this location (the refueling track) are in close proximity to teardrop an entry (holding) and hit the restricted area airspace as this pilot did today. I believe teardrop entry and parallel entries should not be approved when issuing holding instructions close to adjacent airspace; restricted areas; military operations areas; and so forth. I believe phraseology should exist to prohibit pilots from making these holding airspace entries in this manner.