Skip to main content

RDAP RIR Search
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-rir-search-07

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (regext WG)
Authors Tom Harrison , Jasdip Singh
Last updated 2024-02-05 (Latest revision 2024-01-30)
Replaces draft-harrison-regext-rdap-rir-search
RFC stream Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats
Additional resources Mailing list discussion
Stream WG state WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up
Associated WG milestone
Mar 2024
Submit for publication "RDAP RIR Search"
Document shepherd Mario Loffredo
Shepherd write-up Show Last changed 2023-12-18
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus boilerplate Yes
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it
draft-ietf-regext-rdap-rir-search-07
Internet Engineering Task Force                              T. Harrison
Internet-Draft                                                     APNIC
Intended status: Standards Track                                J. Singh
Expires: 3 August 2024                                              ARIN
                                                         31 January 2024

                            RDAP RIR Search
                  draft-ietf-regext-rdap-rir-search-07

Abstract

   The Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) is used by Regional
   Internet Registries (RIRs) and Domain Name Registries (DNRs) to
   provide access to their resource registration information.  The core
   specifications for RDAP define basic search functionality, but there
   are various IP and ASN-related search options provided by RIRs via
   their Whois services for which there is no corresponding RDAP
   functionality.  This document extends RDAP to support those search
   options.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on 3 August 2024.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
   license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.  Code Components

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

   extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Basic Searches  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Path Segments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  IP Network Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.3.  Autonomous System Number Search . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Relation Searches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  Path Segments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.2.  Relation Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       3.2.1.  Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       3.2.2.  Relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
         3.2.2.1.  "up"  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
         3.2.2.2.  "down"  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
         3.2.2.3.  "top" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
         3.2.2.4.  "bottom"  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     3.3.  Status  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     3.4.  Link Relations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   4.  Responding To Searches  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   5.  Reverse Search  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   6.  RDAP Conformance  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   7.  Privacy Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   9.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     9.1.  RDAP Extensions Registry  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     9.2.  Link Relations Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     9.3.  RDAP Reverse Search Registry  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     9.4.  RDAP Reverse Search Mapping Registry  . . . . . . . . . .  21
   10. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
     10.1.  APNIC RDAP Implementation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
   11. Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
   12. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     12.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     12.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

1.  Introduction

   The Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) [RFC7480] is used by
   Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) and Domain Name Registries (DNRs)
   to provide access to their resource registration information.  The
   core specifications for RDAP define basic search functionality, but
   this is limited to domains, nameservers, and entities.  No searches
   were defined for IP networks or autonomous system numbers.  In an
   effort to have RDAP reach feature parity with the existing RIR Whois
   services in this respect, this document defines additional search
   options for IP networks and autonomous system numbers.

   While this document is in terms of RIRs and DNRs for the sake of
   consistency with earlier RDAP documents such as [RFC9082] and
   [RFC9083], the functionality described here may be used by any RDAP
   server operator that hosts Internet Number Resource (INR) objects,
   such as National Internet Registries (NIRs) or Local Internet
   Registries (LIRs).

1.1.  Conventions Used in This Document

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

   Indentation and whitespace in examples are provided only to
   illustrate element relationships, and are not a REQUIRED feature of
   this protocol.

   "..." in examples is used as shorthand for elements defined outside
   of this document.

2.  Basic Searches

2.1.  Path Segments

   The new resource type path segments for basic search (similar to the
   searches defined in [RFC9082] and [RFC9083]) are:

      'ips': Used to identify an IP network search using a pattern to
      match one of a set of IP network attributes.

      'autnums': Used to identify an autonomous system number search
      using a pattern to match one of a set of autonomous system number
      attributes.

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

   A search pattern matches a value where it equals the string
   representation of the value, or where it is a match for the value in
   accordance with the partial string matching behaviour defined in
   section 4.1 of [RFC9082].

2.2.  IP Network Search

   Syntax: ips?handle=<handle search pattern>

   Syntax: ips?name=<name search pattern>

   Searches for IP network information by handle are specified using the
   form:

   ips?handle=XXXX

   XXXX is a search pattern representing an IP network identifier, the
   syntax for which is specific to the registration provider.  The
   following URL would be used to find information for IP networks with
   handles matching the "NET-199*" pattern:

   https://example.com/rdap/ips?handle=NET-199*

   Searches for IP network information by name are specified using the
   form:

   ips?name=XXXX

   XXXX is a search pattern representing an IP network identifier that
   is assigned to the network registration by the registration holder.
   The following URL would be used to find information for IP networks
   with names matching the "NET-EXAMPLE-*" pattern:

   https://example.com/rdap/ips?name=NET-EXAMPLE-*

2.3.  Autonomous System Number Search

   Syntax: autnums?handle=<handle search pattern>

   Syntax: autnums?name=<name search pattern>

   Searches for autonomous system number information by handle are
   specified using the form:

   autnums?handle=XXXX

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

   XXXX is a search pattern representing an autonomous system number
   identifier, the syntax for which is specific to the registration
   provider.  The following URL would be used to find information for
   autonomous system numbers with handles matching the "AS1*" pattern:

   https://example.com/rdap/autnums?handle=AS1*

   Searches for autonomous system number information by name are
   specified using the form:

   autnums?name=XXXX

   XXXX is a search pattern representing an autonomous system number
   identifier that is assigned to the autonomous system number
   registration by the registration holder.  The following URL would be
   used to find information for autonomous system numbers with names
   matching the "ASN-EXAMPLE-*" pattern:

   https://example.com/rdap/autnums?name=ASN-EXAMPLE-*

3.  Relation Searches

   [RFC9083] contains example objects that make use of the "up" link
   relation in order to simplify the process of finding the parent
   object for a given object.  This section defines searches for finding
   objects and sets of objects with respect to their position within a
   hierarchy.

3.1.  Path Segments

   The variables used in the path segments include:

      <relation>: A relation type, as defined in Section 3.2.2 of this
      document.

      <IP address>: An IP address, as defined in Section 3.1.1 of
      [RFC9082].

      <CIDR prefix> The first address of a CIDR block, as defined in
      Section 3.1.1 of [RFC9082].

      <CIDR length>: The prefix length for a CIDR block, as defined in
      Section 3.1.1 of [RFC9082].

      <domain name>: A fully-qualified domain name, as defined in
      Section 3.1.3 of [RFC9082].

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

      <autonomous system number or range> An autonomous system number,
      as defined in Section 3.1.2 of [RFC9082], or two such numbers
      separated by a single hyphen ('-', US-ASCII value 0x2D), where the
      second number is greater than the first.

   The new resource type path segments for relation search (similar to
   the searches defined in [RFC9082] and [RFC9083]) are:

      'ips/rirSearch1/<relation>/<IP address>': Used to identify an IP
      network search using a relation and an address to match a set of
      IP networks.

      'ips/rirSearch1/<relation>/<CIDR prefix>/<CIDR length>': Used to
      identify an IP network search using a relation and a range to
      match a set of IP networks.

      'autnums/rirSearch1/<relation>/<autonomous system number or
      range>': Used to identify an autonomous system number search using
      a relation and a single ASN or an ASN range to match a set of ASN
      objects.

      'domains/rirSearch1/<relation>/<domain name>': Used to identify a
      reverse domain search using a relation and a reverse domain name
      to match a set of reverse domains.

3.2.  Relation Search

   Syntax: <object class search path
   segment>/rirSearch1/<relation>/<object-value>[?status=<status>]

   The relation searches defined in this document rely on the syntax
   described above.  Each search works in the same way for each object
   type.

3.2.1.  Definitions

   An Internet Number Resource (INR) object value (i.e. an IP network
   address or range, autonomous system number or number range, or
   reverse domain name) may have a "parent" object and one or more
   "child" objects.  The "parent" object is the next-least-specific
   object that exists in the relevant registry, while the "child"
   objects are the next-most-specific objects that exist in the relevant
   registry.  For example, for a registry with the following seven IP
   network objects:

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

                           +--------------+
                           | 192.0.2.0/24 |
                           +--------------+
                              /        \
                 +--------------+    +----------------+
                 | 192.0.2.0/25 |    | 192.0.2.128/25 |
                 +--------------+    +----------------+
                    /                   /          \
        +--------------+   +----------------+  +----------------+
        | 192.0.2.0/28 |   | 192.0.2.128/26 |  | 192.0.2.192/26 |
        +--------------+   +----------------+  +----------------+
           /
    +--------------+
    | 192.0.2.0/32 |
    +--------------+

                     Figure 1: Example registry objects

   the INR object value to parent/child object relationships are:

                   +==================+================+
                   | INR object value | Parent object  |
                   +==================+================+
                   | 192.0.2.0/32     | 192.0.2.0/28   |
                   +------------------+----------------+
                   | 192.0.2.0/28     | 192.0.2.0/25   |
                   +------------------+----------------+
                   | 192.0.2.64/26    | 192.0.2.0/25   |
                   +------------------+----------------+
                   | 192.0.2.128/26   | 192.0.2.128/25 |
                   +------------------+----------------+
                   | 192.0.2.192/26   | 192.0.2.128/25 |
                   +------------------+----------------+
                   | 192.0.2.128/25   | 192.0.2.0/24   |
                   +------------------+----------------+
                   | 192.0.2.0/25     | 192.0.2.0/24   |
                   +------------------+----------------+
                   | 192.0.2.0/24     | N/A            |
                   +------------------+----------------+

                          Table 1: Parent objects

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

           +==================+================================+
           | INR object value | Child objects                  |
           +==================+================================+
           | 192.0.2.0/24     | 192.0.2.0/25, 192.0.2.128/25   |
           +------------------+--------------------------------+
           | 192.0.2.0/25     | 192.0.2.0/28                   |
           +------------------+--------------------------------+
           | 192.0.2.128/25   | 192.0.2.128/26, 192.0.2.192/26 |
           +------------------+--------------------------------+
           | 192.0.2.64/26    | N/A                            |
           +------------------+--------------------------------+
           | 192.0.2.128/26   | N/A                            |
           +------------------+--------------------------------+
           | 192.0.2.192/26   | N/A                            |
           +------------------+--------------------------------+
           | 192.0.2.0/28     | 192.0.2.0/32                   |
           +------------------+--------------------------------+
           | 192.0.2.0/32     | N/A                            |
           +------------------+--------------------------------+

                           Table 2: Child objects

   Along similar lines, each INR object value may have a "top" object,
   being the least-specific covering object that exists in the registry,
   and one or more "bottom" objects, being the most-specific objects
   that entirely cover the INR object value when taken together.  Given
   the registry defined in the previous paragraph, the top and bottom
   object relationships are:

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

                    +==================+==============+
                    | INR object value | Top object   |
                    +==================+==============+
                    | 192.0.2.0/32     | 192.0.2.0/24 |
                    +------------------+--------------+
                    | 192.0.2.0/28     | 192.0.2.0/24 |
                    +------------------+--------------+
                    | 192.0.2.64/26    | 192.0.2.0/24 |
                    +------------------+--------------+
                    | 192.0.2.128/26   | 192.0.2.0/24 |
                    +------------------+--------------+
                    | 192.0.2.192/26   | 192.0.2.0/24 |
                    +------------------+--------------+
                    | 192.0.2.128/25   | 192.0.2.0/24 |
                    +------------------+--------------+
                    | 192.0.2.0/25     | 192.0.2.0/24 |
                    +------------------+--------------+
                    | 192.0.2.0/24     | N/A          |
                    +------------------+--------------+

                            Table 3: Top objects

     +==================+===========================================+
     | INR object value | Bottom objects                            |
     +==================+===========================================+
     | 192.0.2.0/24     | 192.0.2.0/25, 192.0.2.0/28, 192.0.2.0/32, |
     |                  | 192.0.2.128/26, 192.0.2.192/26            |
     +------------------+-------------------------------------------+
     | 192.0.2.0/25     | 192.0.2.0/25, 192.0.2.0/28, 192.0.2.0/32  |
     +------------------+-------------------------------------------+
     | 192.0.2.128/25   | 192.0.2.128/26, 192.0.2.192/26            |
     +------------------+-------------------------------------------+
     | 192.0.2.64/26    | N/A                                       |
     +------------------+-------------------------------------------+
     | 192.0.2.128/26   | N/A                                       |
     +------------------+-------------------------------------------+
     | 192.0.2.192/26   | N/A                                       |
     +------------------+-------------------------------------------+
     | 192.0.2.0/28     | 192.0.2.0/28, 192.0.2.0/32                |
     +------------------+-------------------------------------------+
     | 192.0.2.0/31     | 192.0.2.0/28, 192.0.2.0/32                |
     +------------------+-------------------------------------------+
     | 192.0.2.0/32     | N/A                                       |
     +------------------+-------------------------------------------+

                         Table 4: Bottom objects

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

   If there are no more-specific objects for a given INR object value,
   then the set of bottom objects for that INR object value will be
   empty.  192.0.2.0/32 is an example of such an INR object value.

   It is not necessarily the case that the bottom objects for a given
   INR object value will be disjoint.  For example, 192.0.2.0/28's
   bottom objects are 192.0.2.0/28 and 192.0.2.0/32.  192.0.2.0/32 is
   included because it is one of the most-specific objects (i.e. an
   object at the bottom of the object hierarchy) for 192.0.2.0/28, while
   192.0.2.0/28 itself is included because it is the most-specific
   object for the other addresses within the range (i.e. those aside
   from 192.0.2.0/32).

   The bottom objects for a given INR object value may include an object
   that is less-specific than that INR object value.  For example,
   192.0.2.0/31 is an INR object value that has a more-specific object,
   being 192.0.2.0/32, so the set of bottom objects must include at
   least that object.  The most-specific object that covers the residual
   (i.e. 192.0.2.1/32) is 192.0.2.0/28, so it is included in the results
   as well.

3.2.2.  Relations

3.2.2.1.  "up"

   If the server receives a search containing the relation value "up",
   it will return the parent object for the specified INR object value.
   If no such object exists, it will return an empty search response.

3.2.2.2.  "down"

   If the server receives a search containing the relation value "down",
   it will return the child objects for the specified INR object value.
   If no such objects exist, it will return an empty search response.
   Per the definitions section, this includes only immediate child
   objects.

3.2.2.3.  "top"

   If the server receives a search containing the relation value "top",
   it will return the top object for the specified INR object value.  If
   no such object exists, it will return an empty search response.

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 10]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

3.2.2.4.  "bottom"

   If the server receives a search containing the relation value
   "bottom", it will return the bottom objects for the specified INR
   object value.  If no such objects exist, it will return an empty
   search response.

3.3.  Status

   If the "status" argument is provided, then response processing will
   proceed as though all objects without the specified status had first
   been removed from the database.  For example, if the registry objects
   from section 3.2.1 had the following statuses:

                       +================+==========+
                       | Object         | Status   |
                       +================+==========+
                       | 192.0.2.0/25   | active   |
                       +----------------+----------+
                       | 192.0.2.128/25 | inactive |
                       +----------------+----------+
                       | 192.0.2.128/26 | active   |
                       +----------------+----------+
                       | 192.0.2.192/26 | active   |
                       +----------------+----------+

                             Table 5: Statuses

   then a server receiving a "child" object query with the INR object
   value 192.0.2.0/24 and a "status" argument of "active" would return
   the objects 192.0.2.0/25, 192.0.2.128/26, and 192.0.2.192/26.

   Status filtering is useful, for example, where the client is trying
   to find the delegation from an RIR to an RIR account holder: by using
   the "top" relation with a "status" of "active", the delegation from
   IANA to the RIR will be ignored, and the client will receive the
   delegation from the RIR to the account holder in the response
   instead.

   By default, any valid status value may be used for status filtering.
   Server operators MAY opt not to support "status" filtering for the
   "down" and "bottom" link relations, in which case the server should
   respond with a HTTP 501 (Not Implemented) [RFC9110] response code if
   it receives such a request.  Server operators MAY also opt not to
   support "status" filtering for values other than "active" for the
   "up" and "top" link relations, in which case the server should
   respond with a HTTP 501 (Not Implemented) [RFC9110] response code if
   it receives such a request.

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 11]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

3.4.  Link Relations

   Each of the relations defined in section 3.2.2 has a corresponding
   link relation that can be used for a link object contained within
   another RDAP object.  When constructing these link objects, the
   server MUST set link targets that yield the same response as for the
   corresponding search.  The following is an elided example of a
   response that makes use of those link relations:

{
  "startAddress": "192.0.2.0",
  "endAddress": "192.0.2.127",
  ...
  "links": [
    ...,
    {
      "value": "https://rdap.example.com/ip/192.0.2.0/25",
      "rel": "up",
      "href": "https://rdap.example.com/ips/rirSearch1/up/192.0.2.0/25",
      "type": "application/rdap+json"
    },
    {
      "value": "https://rdap.example.com/ip/192.0.2.0/25",
      "rel": "down",
      "href": "https://rdap.example.com/ips/rirSearch1/down/192.0.2.0/25",
      "type": "application/rdap+json"
    },
    {
      "value": "https://rdap.example.com/ip/192.0.2.0/25",
      "rel": "top",
      "href": "https://rdap.example.com/ips/rirSearch1/top/192.0.2.0/25",
      "type": "application/rdap+json"
    },
    {
      "value": "https://rdap.example.com/ip/192.0.2.0/25",
      "rel": "bottom",
      "href": "https://rdap.example.com/ips/rirSearch1/bottom/192.0.2.0/25",
      "type": "application/rdap+json"
    }
  ]
}

                       Figure 2: Example links

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 12]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

   Two additional link relations are defined that correspond to relation
   searches with a "status" of "active": "top-active" and "up-active".
   No other status-specific link relations are defined, because the only
   known use cases for status filtering involve the "top" and "up"
   relations and the "active" status.

   Since the "top" and "up" link relations resolve to a single object,
   it is possible to simply include that object's link in the "href"
   attribute in the link object.  The following is an elided example of
   a response that uses this approach:

        {
          "startAddress": "192.0.2.0",
          "endAddress": "192.0.2.127",
          ...
          "links": [
            ...,
            {
              "value": "https://rdap.example.com/ip/192.0.2.0/25",
              "rel": "up",
              "href": "https://rdap.example.com/192.0.2.0/24",
              "type": "application/rdap+json"
            }
          ]
        }

                   Figure 3: Example single object links

   This section mandates specific behaviour for the "up" link relation,
   but does not define that link relation (see [RFC8288]).  This is
   acceptable, because this behaviour:

      does not conflict with the current description of the link
      relation; and

      is not generally applicable, but instead limited to the context of
      RDAP INR objects only.

   Use of these link relations in responses is OPTIONAL.  The absence in
   a response of a link for a specific relation does not necessarily
   mean that the corresponding object does not exist or that the
   corresponding search will return no results.

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 13]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

4.  Responding To Searches

   As with [RFC9083], responses to the IP network and autonomous system
   number searches defined in the previous sections take the form of an
   array of object instances, where each instance is an appropriate
   object class for the search (i.e., a search beginning with /ips
   yields an array of IP network object instances, and a search
   beginning with /autnums yields an array of autonomous system number
   object instances).  The IP network object and autonomous system
   number object types are defined in sections 5.4 and 5.5 of [RFC9083].
   The object instance arrays are contained within the response object.

   The names of the arrays are as follows:

      for /ips searches, the array is "ipSearchResults"; and

      for /autnums searches, the array is "autnumSearchResults".

   The following is an elided example of a response to an IP network
   search:

   {
     "rdapConformance": [ "rdap_level_0", "rirSearch1",
                          "ips", "ipSearchResults", ... ],
     ...
     "ipSearchResults": [
       {
         "objectClassName": "ip network",
         "handle": "XXXX-RIR",
         "startAddress": "192.0.2.0",
         "endAddress": "192.0.2.127",
         ...
       },
       {
         "objectClassName": "ip network",
         "handle": "YYYY-RIR",
         "startAddress": "192.0.2.0",
         "endAddress": "192.0.2.255",
         ...
       }
     ]
   }

                    Figure 4: IP network search response

   The following is an elided example of a response to an autonomous
   system number search:

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 14]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

   {
     "rdapConformance": [ "rdap_level_0", "rirSearch1",
                          "autnums", "autnumSearchResults", ... ],
     ...
     "autnumSearchResults": [
       {
         "objectClassName": "autnum",
         "handle": "XXXX-RIR",
         "startAutnum": 64496,
         "endAutnum": 64496,
         ...
       },
       {
         "objectClassName": "autnum",
         "handle": "YYYY-RIR",
         "startAddress": "64497",
         "endAddress": "64497",
         ...
       }
     ]
   }

                       Figure 5: ASN search response

   Responses for relation searches for reverse domain objects have the
   same form as for a standard domain search response, per [RFC9083].

   If the search can be processed by the server, but there are no
   results for the search, then the server returns a HTTP 200 (OK)
   response code, with the body of the response containing an empty
   results array.

5.  Reverse Search

   RDAP reverse search is defined by
   [I-D.ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search].  That document limits reverse
   search to domains, nameservers, and entities.  This document extends
   reverse search to cover IP networks and autonomous system numbers as
   well.

   If a server receives a reverse search query with a searchable
   resource type (per the definition of that term in
   [I-D.ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search]) of "ips", then the reverse
   search will be performed on the IP network objects from its data
   store.  Similarly, if a server receives a reverse search query with a
   searchable resource type of "autnums", then the reverse search will
   be performed on the autonomous system number objects from its data
   store.

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 15]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

   Additionally, Section 9 includes requests to register new entries for
   IP network and autonomous system number searches in the RDAP Reverse
   Search and RDAP Reverse Search Mapping IANA registries.

6.  RDAP Conformance

   A server that supports the functionality specified in this document
   MUST include additional string literals in the rdapConformance array
   of its responses, in accordance with the following:

      any response that includes an IP network basic search link, an IP
      network relation search link, or an IP network reverse search
      link, includes the "rirSearch1" and "ips" literals;

      any response for an IP network basic search request, an IP network
      relation search request, or an IP network reverse search request
      includes the "rirSearch1", "ips", and "ipSearchResults" literals;

      any response that includes an ASN basic search link, an ASN
      relation search link, or an ASN reverse search link includes the
      "rirSearch1" and "autnums" literals;

      any response for an ASN basic search request, an ASN relation
      search request, or an ASN reverse search request includes the
      "rirSearch1", "autnums", and "autnumSearchResults" literals;

      any response that includes a domain relation search link includes
      the "rirSearch1" literal;

      any response for a domain relation search request includes the
      "rirSearch1" literal; and

      a response to a "/help" request includes the "rirSearch1", "ips",
      "ipSearchResults", "autnums", and "autnumSearchResults" literals.

   Although responses will generally not include all of the
   rdapConformance string literals defined in this document, that is not
   meant to imply that a server can support only a portion of the
   functionality defined in this document.

   The "ips", "autnums", "ipSearchResults", and "autnumSearchResults"
   extension identifiers are included here due to the requirements set
   out in [RFC7480], [RFC9082], and [RFC9083] that an RDAP extension
   identifier be used as a prefix in new path segments and JSON members
   introduced by the extension, and those strings are used as such as
   part of the basic searches defined in this document.  Furthermore,
   using these strings as path segments helps to increase consistency
   among the basic searches for the core RDAP object types.

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 16]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

   As with the other core object classes (entity, domain, and
   nameserver), other documents may define additional reverse searches
   with IP networks and ASNs as the searchable resource type by
   registering those in the IANA RDAP reverse search registries.
   Because a given extension identifier must correspond to a single
   extension, though, any document making use of IP networks or ASNs as
   the searchable resource type must also implement the functionality
   described in this document.

7.  Privacy Considerations

   The search functionality defined in this document may affect the
   privacy of entities in the registry (and elsewhere) in various ways:
   see [RFC6973] for a general treatment of privacy in protocol
   specifications.  Server operators should be aware of the tradeoffs
   that result from implementation of this functionality.

   Many jurisdictions have laws or regulations that restrict the use of
   "Personal Data", per the definition in [RFC6973].  Given that, server
   operators should ascertain whether the regulatory environment in
   which they operate permits implementation of the functionality
   defined in this document.

8.  Security Considerations

   [RFC7481] describes security requirements and considerations for RDAP
   generally.

9.  IANA Considerations

9.1.  RDAP Extensions Registry

   IANA is requested to register the following values in the RDAP
   Extensions Registry:

   *  Extension identifier: rirSearch1

   *  Registry operator: Any

   *  Published specification: [this document]

   *  Contact: IETF <iesg@ietf.org>

   *  Intended usage: This extension identifier is used for INR-specific
      search operations.

   *  Extension identifier: ips

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 17]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

   *  Registry operator: Any

   *  Published specification: [this document]

   *  Contact: IETF <iesg@ietf.org>

   *  Intended usage: This extension identifier is used for INR-specific
      search operations.

   *  Extension identifier: autnums

   *  Registry operator: Any

   *  Published specification: [this document]

   *  Contact: IETF <iesg@ietf.org>

   *  Intended usage: This extension identifier is used for INR-specific
      search operations.

   *  Extension identifier: ipSearchResults

   *  Registry operator: Any

   *  Published specification: [this document]

   *  Contact: IETF <iesg@ietf.org>

   *  Intended usage: This extension identifier is used for INR-specific
      search operations.

   *  Extension identifier: autnumSearchResults

   *  Registry operator: Any

   *  Published specification: [this document]

   *  Contact: IETF <iesg@ietf.org>

   *  Intended usage: This extension identifier is used for INR-specific
      search operations.

9.2.  Link Relations Registry

   IANA is requested to register the following values in the Link
   Relations Registry:

   *  Relation Name: up-active

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 18]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

   *  Description: Refers to an RDAP parent document that has a status
      of "active" in a hierarchy of documents.

   *  Reference: [this document]

   *  Relation Name: down

   *  Description: Refers to a set of child documents in a hierarchy of
      documents.

   *  Reference: [this document]

   *  Relation Name: top

   *  Description: Refers to the topmost parent document in a hierarchy
      of documents.

   *  Reference: [this document]

   *  Relation Name: top-active

   *  Description: Refers to the topmost RDAP parent document that has a
      status of "active" in a hierarchy of documents.

   *  Reference: [this document]

   *  Relation Name: bottom

   *  Description: Refers to the set of child documents that do not
      themselves have child documents, in a hierarchy of documents.

   *  Reference: [this document]

9.3.  RDAP Reverse Search Registry

   IANA is requested to register the following entries in the "RDAP
   Reverse Search" registry:

   Searchable Resource Type:  ips, autnums

   Related Resource Type:  entity

   Property:  fn

   Description:  The server supports the IP/autnum search based on the
      full name (a.k.a formatted name) of an associated entity.

   Registrant Name:  IETF

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 19]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

   Registrant Contact Information:  iesg@ietf.org

   Reference:  This document.

   Searchable Resource Type:  ips, autnums

   Related Resource Type:  entity

   Property:  handle

   Description:  The server supports the IP/autnum search based on the
      handle of an associated entity.

   Registrant Name:  IETF

   Registrant Contact Information:  iesg@ietf.org

   Reference:  This document.

   Searchable Resource Type:  ips, autnums

   Related Resource Type:  entity

   Property:  email

   Description:  The server supports the IP/autnum search based on the
      email address of an associated entity.

   Registrant Name:  IETF

   Registrant Contact Information:  iesg@ietf.org

   Reference:  This document.

   Searchable Resource Type:  ips, autnums

   Related Resource Type:  entity

   Property:  role

   Description:  The server supports the IP/autnum search based on the
      role of an associated entity.

   Registrant Name:  IETF

   Registrant Contact Information:  iesg@ietf.org

   Reference:  This document.

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 20]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

9.4.  RDAP Reverse Search Mapping Registry

   IANA is requested to register the following entries in the "RDAP
   Reverse Search Mapping" registry:

   Searchable Resource Type:  ips, autnums

   Related Resource Type:  entity

   Property:  fn

   Property Path:  $..entities[*].vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='fn')][3]

   Registrant Name:  IETF

   Registrant Contact Information:  iesg@ietf.org

   Reference:  This document.

   Searchable Resource Type:  ips, autnums

   Related Resource Type:  entity

   Property:  handle

   Property Path:  $..entities[*].handle

   Registrant Name:  IETF

   Registrant Contact Information:  iesg@ietf.org

   Reference:  This document.

   Searchable Resource Type:  ips, autnums

   Related Resource Type:  entity

   Property:  email

   Property Path:  $..entities[*].vcardArray[1][?(@[0]=='email')][3]

   Registrant Name:  IETF

   Registrant Contact Information:  iesg@ietf.org

   Reference:  This document.

   Searchable Resource Type:  ips, autnums

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 21]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

   Related Resource Type:  entity

   Property:  role

   Property Path:  $..entities[*].roles

   Registrant Name:  IETF

   Registrant Contact Information:  iesg@ietf.org

   Reference:  This document.

10.  Implementation Status

      |  Note to the RFC Editor - remove this section before
      |  publication, as well as the reference to RFC 7942.

   This section records the status of known implementations of the
   protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this
   Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in [RFC7942].
   The description of implementations in this section is intended to
   assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to
   RFCs.  Please note that the listing of any individual implementation
   here does not imply endorsement by the IETF.  Furthermore, no effort
   has been spent to verify the information presented here that was
   supplied by IETF contributors.  This is not intended as, and must not
   be construed to be, a catalogue of available implementations or their
   features.  Readers are advised to note that other implementations may
   exist.

   According to [RFC7942], "this will allow reviewers and working groups
   to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of
   running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation
   and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature.
   It is up to the individual working groups to use this information as
   they see fit".

10.1.  APNIC RDAP Implementation

   *  Responsible Organization: Asia-Pacific Network Information Centre
      (APNIC)

   *  Location: https://github.com/APNIC-net/rdap-rmp-demo/tree/rir-
      search

   *  Description: This implementation includes support for the various
      searches and responses described in this document.

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 22]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

   *  Level of Maturity: This is a proof-of-concept implementation.

   *  Coverage: This implementation includes all of the features
      described in this specification.

   *  Contact Information: Tom Harrison, tomh@apnic.net

11.  Acknowledgements

   The authors wish to thank Mario Loffredo, Andy Newton, Antoin
   Verschuren, and James Gould for document review and associated
   comments.

12.  References

12.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search]
              Loffredo, M. and M. Martinelli, "Registration Data Access
              Protocol (RDAP) Reverse Search", Work in Progress,
              Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search-26,
              13 November 2023, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
              draft-ietf-regext-rdap-reverse-search-26>.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC7481]  Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the
              Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95,
              RFC 7481, DOI 10.17487/RFC7481, March 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7481>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

   [RFC9082]  Hollenbeck, S. and A. Newton, "Registration Data Access
              Protocol (RDAP) Query Format", STD 95, RFC 9082,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC9082, June 2021,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9082>.

   [RFC9083]  Hollenbeck, S. and A. Newton, "JSON Responses for the
              Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95,
              RFC 9083, DOI 10.17487/RFC9083, June 2021,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9083>.

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 23]
Internet-Draft               RDAP RIR Search                January 2024

   [RFC9110]  Fielding, R., Ed., Nottingham, M., Ed., and J. Reschke,
              Ed., "HTTP Semantics", STD 97, RFC 9110,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC9110, June 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9110>.

12.2.  Informative References

   [RFC6973]  Cooper, A., Tschofenig, H., Aboba, B., Peterson, J.,
              Morris, J., Hansen, M., and R. Smith, "Privacy
              Considerations for Internet Protocols", RFC 6973,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6973, July 2013,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6973>.

   [RFC7480]  Newton, A., Ellacott, B., and N. Kong, "HTTP Usage in the
              Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95,
              RFC 7480, DOI 10.17487/RFC7480, March 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7480>.

   [RFC7942]  Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running
              Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205,
              RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.

   [RFC8288]  Nottingham, M., "Web Linking", RFC 8288,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8288, October 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8288>.

Authors' Addresses

   Tom Harrison
   Asia Pacific Network Information Centre
   6 Cordelia St
   South Brisbane QLD 4101
   Australia
   Email: tomh@apnic.net

   Jasdip Singh
   American Registry for Internet Numbers
   PO Box 232290
   Centreville, VA 20120
   United States of America
   Email: jasdips@arin.net

Harrison & Singh          Expires 3 August 2024                [Page 24]