Registry Reporting Repository
draft-mcpherson-sattler-registry-reporting-repo-00

Internet Engineering Task Force                             N. McPherson
Internet-Draft                                           1&1 Internet SE
Intended status: Best Current Practice                        T. Sattler
Expires: January 24, 2019                                  July 25, 2018

                       Registry Reporting Repository
            draft-mcpherson-sattler-registry-reporting-repo-00

Abstract

   This document describes a domain name registry reporting repository
   used to provide reports to accredited domain name registrars.

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 January 24, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 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 extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

McPherson & Sattler     Expires January 24, 2019                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft        Registry Reporting Repository            July 2018

Table of Contents
   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Terminology and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  SFTP Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  SFTP Account  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  SFTP Directory Structure . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  SFTP Server Maintenance   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   9.  Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     10.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     10.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Appendix A.  Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Appendix B.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

McPherson & Sattler     Expires January 24, 2019                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft        Registry Reporting Repository            July 2018

1.  Introduction

   Modern top-level domain registries provide a number of detailed
   reports and documents that their registrars require on a daily,
   weekly and monthly basis. These most commonly include transaction
   reports, as well as lists containing currently unavailable domains
   and current premium domains. These reports are critical for
   registrars' businesses and play an important role in accounting and
   operations processes as well as in sales and marketing activities.
   In the current set-up registrars must download these reports from
   each registry's intranet in a different manner according to each
   registry's own document management set up.

   This document describes a domain registry reporting repository used
   to provide reports to accredited domain registrars.

2.  Terminology and Definitions

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] when
   specified in their uppercase forms.

3.  SFTP Server

   Each domain name registry sets up and manages a SFTP
   (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSH_File_Transfer_Protocol) server.
   Every SFTP server MUST be reachable through a generic URI, such as
   sftp://registry.example, and MUST listen on port 22.
   
   IP whitelisting to reach this SFTP server is RECOMMENDED.

4.  SFTP Account

   Each domain name registry MUST create one SFTP account for every
   accredited domain name registrar. If a registrar owns more than one
   registrar, then a registry SHOULD combine them in one account on
   request by the parent registrar or entity.

   The authentication for a SFTP account should be done with an
   username and key instead of a password.

McPherson & Sattler     Expires January 24, 2019                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft        Registry Reporting Repository            July 2018

5.  SFTP Directory Structure

   The home directory of a SFTP user MUST be its root. This can be
   achieved with e.g. chroot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chroot) and
   prevents that a SFTP user can access other directories that are not
   owned by themselves. All directories MUST be lowercase.

   Files in these directories MUST be stored in an appropriate
   subdirectory according to their creation date.

   /YYYY-MM/foo.example
   /YYYY-MM/domains/foo.example
   /YYYY-MM/foo/bar/example

   YYYY  represents the year in which the file was created, format
         according to ISO 8601 [RFC3339]

   MM    represents the months in which the file was created, format
         according to ISO 8601 [RFC3339]

6.  SFTP Server Maintenance

   Maintenance is important and necessary, especially to keep the SFTP
   server up to date and secure. It MUST be announced in advance. In
   this case the EPP Registry Maintenance Specification
   [I-D.sattler-epp-registry-maintenance] is RECOMMENDED to use. The
   notification notice MUST be send at least 7 days in advance.

7.  IANA Considerations

   This document has no IANA actions.

8.  Security Considerations

   The registry reporting repository described in this document do not
   provide any security services beyond those described by SFTP. The
   security considerations described in these other specifications apply
   to this specification as well.

McPherson & Sattler     Expires January 24, 2019                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft        Registry Reporting Repository            July 2018

9.  Implementation Status

   Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this section and the reference to
   [RFC7942] before publication.

   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 catalog 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".

   Add implementation details once available.

10.  References

10.1.  Normative References

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

McPherson & Sattler     Expires January 24, 2019                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft        Registry Reporting Repository            July 2018

10.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.sattler-epp-registry-maintenance]
              Sattler, T., Roger, C. and Kolker, J., "Registry
              Maintenance Notifications for the Extensible Provisioning
              Protocol (EPP)", <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-
              sattler-epp-registry-maintenance> (work in progress), July
              2018

   [RFC3339]  Klyne, G., Ed. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the
              Internet: Timestamps", RFC 3339, July 2002,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3339>.

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

Appendix A.  Change History

   TBD

Appendix B.  Acknowledgements

   The authors wish to thank the following persons for their feedback
   and suggestions (sorted alphabetically by company):

   * Thomas Keller, 1&1 Internet
   * James Galvin, Afilias
   * Andreas Huber, united-domains

Authors' Addresses

   Neal McPherson
   1&1 Internet SE
   Ernst-Frey-Str. 5
   76135 Karlsruhe
   DE

   Email: neal.mcpherson@1und1.de
   URI:   https://www.1und1.de

   Tobias Sattler

   Email: tobias.sattler@me.com
   URI:   https://tobiassattler.com

McPherson & Sattler     Expires January 24, 2019                [Page 6]