Content-Centric Networking (CCNx) Messages in TLV Format
draft-irtf-icnrg-ccnxmessages-09

The CCNx specs have been under development since the inception of the ICNRG. They are highly mature and ready for publication as Experimental RFCs. They have strong RG consensus, and have undergone careful editing by the authors, review by the IRSG, and furhter refinement by the RFC Editor. The final text is under review by the shepherd.

(Via drafts-eval@iana.org): IESG/Authors/WG Chairs:

We have reviewed draft-irtf-icnrg-ccnxmessages-08 and understand that it requires 10 registry actions. However, we have several questions.

IANA QUESTION --> will the IESG be the organization that designates an expert for the Expert Review/Specification Required registries?

IANA NOTE --> RFC 8126 uses the term "Specification Required" to describe the registration procedure that requires both expert review and the provision of a public, readily accessible specification.

IANA QUESTION --> The first paragraph of the IANA Considerations section states, "Each type registry can be updated by incrementally expanding the type space, i.e., by allocating and reserving new types." Does this refer to allocating and reserving new registries or new registrations? It isn't clear what the term "reserve" would mean in the former context.

We understand that when this document is sent to us for processing, it will require the following actions:

ACTION 1:

The following registry will be created under the heading "CCNx":

Registry Name: CCNx Packet Types
Reference: [This document]
Registration Procedure: RFC Required

Type Name Reference
0 PT_INTEREST [This document, Section 3.2]
1 PT_CONTENT [This document, Section 3.2]
2 PT_RETURN [This document, Section 3.2]
3-255 Unassigned

ACTION 2:

The following registry will be created under the heading "CCNx":

Registry Name: CCNx Interest Return Codes
Reference: [This document]
Registration Procedure: Expert Review
Note: Registration request should include public standard leading to RFC.

Type Name Reference
0 ?
1 T_RETURN_NO_ROUTE [This document, Section 3.2.3.3]
2 T_RETURN_LIMIT_EXCEEDED [This document, Section 3.2.3.3]
3 T_RETURN_NO_RESOURCES [This document, Section 3.2.3.3]
4 T_RETURN_PATH_ERROR [This document, Section 3.2.3.3]
5 T_RETURN_PROHIBITED [This document, Section 3.2.3.3]
6 T_RETURN_CONGESTED [This document, Section 3.2.3.3]
7 T_RETURN_MTU_TOO_LARGE [This document, Section 3.2.3.3]
8 T_RETURN_UNSUPPORTED_HASH_RESTRICTION [This document, Section 3.2.3.3]
9 T_RETURN_MALFORMED_INTEREST [This document, Section 3.2.3.3]
10-255 Unassigned

IANA QUESTION --> Should value 0 be listed as "Reserved" (i.e. unavailable for assignment, per RFC 8126), listed as "Unassigned" (i.e. available for assignment), or left out of the registry?

ACTION 3:

The following registry will be created under the heading "CCNx":

Registry Name: CCNx Hop-by-Hop Types
Reference: [This document]
Registration Procedure: RFC Required

Type Name Reference
0 ?
1 T_INTLIFE [This document, Section 3.4]
2 T_CACHETIME [This document, Section 3.4]
3 T_MSGHASH [This document, Section 3.4]
4-7 Reserved [This document]
8-4093 Unassigned
4094 T_PAD [This document, Section 3.3.1]
4095 T_ORG [This document, Section 3.3.2]
4096-8191 Reserved for Experimental Use [This document, Section 3]
8192-65535 Unasssigned

IANA QUESTION --> Should value 0 be listed as "Reserved" (i.e. unavailable for assignment, per RFC 8126), listed as "Unassigned" (i.e. available for assignment), or left out of the registry?

IANA QUESTION --> The document uses both hex and decimal numbering in this registry. In the future, it may be possible to display more than one method in an IANA registry, but we need to use a consistent method when creating the registry. Should we use hex instead of decimal here?

ACTION 4:

The following registry will be created under the heading "CCNx":

Registry Name: CCNx Top-Level Types
Reference: [This document]
Registration Procedure: RFC Required

Type Name Reference
0 ?
1 T_INTEREST [This document, Section 3.5]
2 T_OBJECT [This document, Section 3.5]
3 T_VALIDATION_ALG [This document, Section 3.5]
4 T_VALIDATION_PAYLOAD [This document, Section 3.5]
5-65535 Unasssigned

IANA QUESTION --> Should value 0 be listed as "Reserved" (i.e. unavailable for assignment, per RFC 8126), listed as "Unassigned" (i.e. available for assignment), or left out of the registry?

ACTION 5:

The following registry will be created under the heading "CCNx":

Registry Name: CCNx Name Segment Types
Reference: [This document]
Registration Procedure: Specification Required

Type Name Reference
0 ?
1 T_NAMESEGMENT [This document, Section 3.6.1]
2 T_IPID [This document, Section 3.6.1]
3-15 Unassigned
16-19 Reserved [This document]
20-4094 Unassigned
4095 T_ORG [This document, Section 3.3.2]
4096-8191 T_APP:00 - T_APP:4096 [This document, Section 3.6.1]
8192-65535 Unasssigned

IANA QUESTION --> Should value 0 be listed as "Reserved" (i.e. unavailable for assignment, per RFC 8126), listed as "Unassigned" (i.e. available for assignment), or left out of the registry?

IANA QUESTION --> In the document, this registry uses both hex and decimal numbering. Should the IANA registry use hex or decimal?

IANA QUESTION --> The registration procedure listed in the IANA Considerations section, "Expert Review with public specification," appears to match the RFC 8126 term "Specification Required," which requires expert review. Is this correct? If so, this should be changed in the document.

ACTION 6:

The following registry will be created under the heading "CCNx":

Registry Name: CCNx Message Types
Reference: [This document]
Registration Procedure: RFC Required

Type Name Reference
0 T_NAME [This document, Section 3.6]
1 T_PAYLOAD [This document, Section 3.6]
2 T_KEYIDRESTR [This document, Section 3.6]
3 T_OBJHASHRESTR [This document, Section 3.6]
4 Unassigned
5 T_PAYLDTYPE [This document, Section 3.6.2.2]
6 T_EXPIRY [This document, Section 3.6.2.2]
7-12 Reserved [This document]
8-4093 Unassigned
4094 T_PAD [This document, Section 3.3.1]
4095 T_ORG [This document, Section 3.3.2]
4096-8191 Reserved for Experimental Use [This document, Section 3]
8192-65535 Unasssigned

IANA QUESTION --> Should value 0 be listed as "Reserved" (i.e. unavailable for assignment, per RFC 8126), listed as "Unassigned" (i.e. available for assignment), or left out of the registry?

IANA QUESTION --> In the document, this registry uses both hex and decimal numbering. Should the IANA registry use hex or decimal?

ACTION 7:

The following registry will be created under the heading "CCNx":

Registry Name: CCNx PayloadType
Reference: [This document]
Registration Procedure: Specification Required

Type Name Reference
0 T_PAYLOADTYPE_DATA [This document, Section 3.6.2.2.1]
1 T_PAYLOADTYPE_KEY [This document, Section 3.6.2.2.1]
2 T_PAYLOADTYPE_LINK [This document, Section 3.6.2.2.1]

IANA QUESTION --> Does this registry have a maximum available value (e.g. 255, 65535, etc.)?

IANA QUESTION --> The registration procedure listed in the IANA Considerations section, "Expert Review with public specification," appears to match the RFC 8126 term "Specification Required," which requires expert review. Is this correct? If so, this should be changed in the document.

ACTION 8:

The following registry will be created under the heading "CCNx":

Registry Name: CCNx Validation Algorithm Types
Reference: [This document]
Registration Procedure: Specification Required

Type Name Reference
0 ?
1 Unassigned
2 T_CRC32C [This document, Section 3.6.4.1]
3 Unassigned
4 T_HMAC-SHA256 [This document, Section 3.6.4.1]
5 T_RSA-SHA256 [This document, Section 3.6.4.1]
6 EC-SECP-256K1 [This document, Section 3.6.4.1]
7 EC-SECP-384R1 [This document, Section 3.6.4.1]
8-4093 Unassigned
4094 T_PAD [This document, Section 3.3.1]
4095 T_ORG [This document, Section 3.3.2]
4096-8191 Reserved for Experimental Use [This document, Section 3]
8192-65535 Unasssigned

IANA QUESTION --> Should value 0 be listed as "Reserved" (i.e. unavailable for assignment, per RFC 8126), listed as "Unassigned" (i.e. available for assignment), or left out of the registry?

IANA QUESTION --> In the document, this registry uses both hex and decimal numbering. Should the IANA registry use hex or decimal?

IANA QUESTION --> The registration procedure listed in the IANA Considerations section, "Expert Review with public specification," appears to match the RFC 8126 term "Specification Required," which requires expert review. Is this correct? If so, this should be changed in the document.

IANA QUESTION --> If the registration procedure is listed as "Specification Required," should there also be a note at the top of the registry that reads "Note: registration requires public specification of the algorithm"?

ACTION 9:

The following registry will be created under the heading "CCNx":

Registry Name: CCNx Validation Dependent Data Types
Reference: [This document]
Registration Procedure: RFC Required

Type Name Reference
0 ?
1-8 Unassigned
9 T_KEYID [This document, Section 3.6.4.1.4]
10 T_PUBLICKEYLOC [This document, Section 3.6.4.1.4]
11 T_PUBLICKEY [This document, Section 3.6.4.1.4]
12 T_CERT [This document, Section 3.6.4.1.4]
13 T_LINK [This document, Section 3.6.4.1.4]
14 T_KEYLINK [This document, Section 3.6.4.1.4]
15 T_SIGTIME [This document, Section 3.6.4.1.4]
16-4094 Unassigned
4095 T_ORG [This document, Section 3.3.2]
4096-8191 Reserved for Experimental Use [This document, Section 3]
8192-65535 Unasssigned

IANA QUESTION --> Should value 0 be listed as "Reserved" (i.e. unavailable for assignment, per RFC 8126), listed as "Unassigned" (i.e. available for assignment), or left out of the registry?

IANA QUESTION --> In the document, this registry uses both hex and decimal numbering. Should the IANA registry use hex or decimal?

ACTION 10:

The following registry will be created under the heading "CCNx":

Registry Name: CCNx Hash Function Types
Reference: [This document]
Registration Procedure: Specification Required

Type Name Reference
0 ?
1 T_SHA-256 [This document, Section 3.3.3]
2 T_SHA-512 [This document, Section 3.3.3]
3-4094 Unassigned
4095 T_ORG [This document, Section 3.3.2]
4096-8191 Reserved for Experimental Use [This document, Section 3]
8192-65535 Unasssigned

IANA QUESTION --> Should value 0 be listed as "Reserved" (i.e. unavailable for assignment, per RFC 8126), listed as "Unassigned" (i.e. available for assignment), or left out of the registry?

IANA QUESTION --> In the document, this registry uses both hex and decimal numbering. Should the IANA registry use hex or decimal?

IANA QUESTION --> The registration procedure listed in the IANA Considerations section, "Expert Review with public specification," appears to match the RFC 8126 term "Specification Required," which requires expert review. Is this correct? If so, this should be changed in the document.

IANA QUESTION --> If the registration procedure is listed as "Specification Required," should there also be a note at the top of the registry that reads "Note: registration requires public specification of the hash function"?

Thank you,

Amanda Baber
Lead IANA Services Specialist

Posted related IPR disclosure: Palo Alto Research Center's Statement about IPR related to draft-irtf-icnrg-ccnxsemantics, draft-irtf-icnrg-ccnxmessages, and Presentations by PARC @ IETF 93, 94, and interim meetings