The update registries draft
draft-rsalz-update-registries-01
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Replaced".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Rich Salz | ||
| Last updated | 2021-01-29 (Latest revision 2021-01-07) | ||
| Replaced by | draft-ietf-ntp-update-registries | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | Candidate for WG Adoption | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-rsalz-update-registries-01
ntp R. Salz
Internet-Draft Akamai Technologies
Intended status: Informational 7 January 2021
Expires: 11 July 2021
The update registries draft
draft-rsalz-update-registries-01
Abstract
The Network Time Protocol (NTP) and Network Time Security (NTS)
documents define a number of assigned number registries, collectively
called the NTP registries. Some registries have wrong values, some
registries do not follow current common practice, and some are just
right. For the sake of completeness, this document reviews all NTP
and NTS registries.
Discussion Venues
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
https://github.com/richsalz/draft-rsalz-update-registries.
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 11 July 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Salz Expires 11 July 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft The update registries draft January 2021
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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Existing Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Reference ID, Kiss-o'-Death . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Extension Field Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.3. Network Time Security Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. New Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. IANA Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. NTP Reference Identifier Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.2. NTP Kiss-o'-Death Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.3. NTP Extension Field Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.4. Network Time Security Key Establishment Record Types . . 9
4.5. Network Time Security Next Protocols . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.6. Network Time Security Error Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.7. Network Time Security Warning Codes . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1. Introduction
The Network Time Protocol (NTP) and Network Time Security (NTS)
documents define a number of assigned number registries, collectively
called the NTP registries. Some registries have wrong values, some
registries do not follow current common practice, and some are just
right. For the sake of completeness, this document reviews all NTP
and NTS registries.
The bulk of this document can be divded into two parts:
* First, each registry, its defining document, and a summary of its
syntax is defined.
* Second, the revised format and entries for each registry are
defined.
Salz Expires 11 July 2021 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft The update registries draft January 2021
2. Existing Registries
This section describes the registries and the rules for them. It is
intended to be a short summary of the syntax and registration
requirements for each registry. The semantics and protocol
processing rules for each registry -- that is, how an implementation
acts when sending or receiving any of the fields -- is not described
here.
2.1. Reference ID, Kiss-o'-Death
[RFC5905] defined two registries, the Reference ID in Section 7.3,
and the Kiss-o'-Death in Section 7.4. Both of these are four ASCII
characters, left justified and padded with zero's. Entries that
start with 0x58, the ASCII letter uppercase X, are reserved for
private experimentation and development. Both registries are first-
come first-served. The formal request to define the registries is in
Section 16.
Section 7.5 of [RFC5905] defined the on-the-wire format of extension
fields but did not create a registry for it.
2.2. Extension Field Types
[RFC5906] mentioned the Extension Field Types registry, and defined
it indirectly by defining 30 extensions (15 each for request and
response) in Section 13. It did not provide a formal definition of
the columns in the registry. Section 10 of [RFC5906] splits the
Field Type into four subfields, only for use within the Autokey
extensions.
[RFC7821] added a new entry, Checksum Complement, to the Extension
Field Types registry.
[RFC7822] clarified the processing rules for Extension Field Types,
particularly around the interaction with the Message Authentication
Code (MAC) field.
[RFC8573] changed the cryptography used in the MAC field.
The following problems exists with the current registry:
* Many of the entries in the Extension Field Types registry have
swapped some of the nibbles; 1234 is listed as 1432 for example.
This document marks the erroneous values as reserved.
* Some values were mistakenly re-used.
Salz Expires 11 July 2021 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft The update registries draft January 2021
2.3. Network Time Security Registries
[RFC8915] defines the Network Time Security (NTS) protocol. Sections
7.1 through 7.5 (inclusive) added entries to existing regisries.
Section 7.6 created a new registry, NTS Key Establishment Record
Types, that partitions the assigned numbers into three different
registration policies: IETF Review, Specification Required, and
Private or Experimental Use.
Section 7.7 created a new registry, NTS Next Protocols, that
similarly partitions the assigned numbers.
Section 7.8 created two new registries, NTS Error Codes and NTS
Warning Codes. Both regisries are also partitioned the same way.
3. New Registries
The following general guidelines apply to all registries defined
here:
* Every entry reserves a partition for private use and
experimentation.
* Registries with ASCII fields are now limited to uppercase letters;
fields starting with 0x2D, the ASCII minus sign, are reserved for
private use.
* The policy for every registry is now specification required, as
defined in Section 4.6 of [RFC8126].
The IESG is requested to choose three designated experts, with two
being required to approve a registry change.
Each entry described in the below sub-sections is intended to
completely replace the existing entry with the same name.
4. IANA Consideration
4.1. NTP Reference Identifier Codes
The registration procedure is changed to specification required.
The Note is changed to read as follows:
* Codes beginning with the character "-" are reserved for
experimentation and development. IANA cannot assign them.
Salz Expires 11 July 2021 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft The update registries draft January 2021
The columns are defined as follows:
* ID (required): a four-byte value padded on the right with zero's.
Each value must be an ASCII uppercase letter or minus sign
* Clock source (required): A brief text description of the ID
* Reference (required): the publication defining the ID.
The existing entries are left unchanged.
4.2. NTP Kiss-o'-Death Codes
The registration procedure is changed to specification required.
The Note is changed to read as follows:
* Codes beginning with the character "-" are reserved for
experimentation and development. IANA cannot assign them.
The columns are defined as follows:
* ID (required): a four-byte value padded on the right with zero's.
Each value must be an ASCII uppercase letter or minus sign.
* Meaning source (required): A brief text description of the ID.
* Reference (required): the publication defining the ID.
The existing entries are left unchanged.
4.3. NTP Extension Field Types
The registration procedure is changed to specification required.
The reference should be [RFC5906] added, if possible.
The following Note is added:
* Field Types in the range 0xF000 through 0xFFFF, inclusive, are
reserved for experimentation and development. IANA cannot assign
them. Both NTS Cookie and Autokey Message Request have the same
Field Type; in practice this is not a problem as the field
semantics will be determined by other parts of the message.
The columns are defined as follows:
* Field Type (required): A two-byte value in hexadecimal.
Salz Expires 11 July 2021 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft The update registries draft January 2021
* Meaning (required): A brief text description of the field type.
* Reference (required): the publication defining the field type.
The table is replaced with the following entries.
+============+===============================+=============+
| Field Type | Meaning | Reference |
+============+===============================+=============+
| 0x0002 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0102 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0104 | Unique Identifier | RFC 8915, |
| | | Section 5.3 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0200 | No-Operation Request | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0201 | Association Message Request | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0202 | Certificate Message Request | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0203 | Cookie Message Request | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0204 | NTS Cookie | RFC 8915, |
| | | Section 5.4 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0204 | Autokey Message Request | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0205 | Leapseconds Message Request | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0206 | Sign Message Request | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0207 | IFF Identity Message Request | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0208 | GQ Identity Message Request | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0209 | MV Identity Message Request | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0302 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0304 | NTS Cookie Placeholder | RFC 8915, |
| | | Section 5.5 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0402 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0404 | NTS Authenticator and | RFC 8915, |
| | Encrypted Extension Fields | Section 5.6 |
Salz Expires 11 July 2021 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft The update registries draft January 2021
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0502 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0602 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0702 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x2005 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8002 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8102 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8200 | No-Operation Response | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8201 | Association Message Response | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8202 | Certificate Message Response | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8203 | Cookie Message Response | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8204 | Autokey Message Response | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8205 | Leapseconds Message Response | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8206 | Sign Message Response | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8207 | IFF Identity Message Response | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8208 | GQ Identity Message Response | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8209 | MV Identity Message Response | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8302 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8402 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8502 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8602 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8702 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8802 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC002 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC102 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
Salz Expires 11 July 2021 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft The update registries draft January 2021
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC200 | No-Operation Error Response | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC201 | Association Message Error | RFC 5906 |
| | Response | |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC202 | Certificate Message Error | RFC 5906 |
| | Response | |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC203 | Cookie Message Error Response | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC204 | Autokey Message Error | RFC 5906 |
| | Response | |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC205 | Leapseconds Message Error | RFC 5906 |
| | Response | |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC206 | Sign Message Error Response | RFC 5906 |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC207 | IFF Identity Message Error | RFC 5906 |
| | Response | |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC208 | GQ Identity Message Error | RFC 5906 |
| | Response | |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC209 | MV Identity Message Error | RFC 5906 |
| | Response | |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC302 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC402 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC502 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC602 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC702 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC802 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x0902 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0x8902 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
| 0xC902 | Reserved for historic reasons | This RFC |
+------------+-------------------------------+-------------+
Table 1
Salz Expires 11 July 2021 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft The update registries draft January 2021
4.4. Network Time Security Key Establishment Record Types
The registration procedure is changed to specification required.
The following note should be added:
* Record Type numbers in the range 0x4000 through 0x7FFF, inclusive,
are reserved for experimentation and development. IANA cannot
assign them.
The existing entries are left unchanged. Should we remove the
Unassigned and Reserved rows? Should we convert the numbers to hex?
4.5. Network Time Security Next Protocols
The registration procedure is changed to specification required.
The following note should be added:
* Protocol ID numbers in the range 0x8000 through 0xFFFF, inclusive,
are reserved for experimentation and development. IANA cannot
assign them.
The existing entries are left unchanged. Should we remove the
Unassigned and Reserved rows? Should we convert the numbers to hex?
4.6. Network Time Security Error Codes
The registration procedure is changed to specification required.
The following note should be added:
* Error code numbers in the range 0x8000 through 0xFFFF, inclusive,
are reserved for experimentation and development. IANA cannot
assign them.
The existing entries are left unchanged. Should we remove the
Unassigned and Reserved rows?
4.7. Network Time Security Warning Codes
The registration procedure is changed to specification required.
The following note should be added:
* Warning code numbers in the range 0x8000 through 0xFFFF,
inclusive, are reserved for experimentation and development. IANA
cannot assign them.
Salz Expires 11 July 2021 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft The update registries draft January 2021
The existing entries are left unchanged. Should we remove the
Unassigned and Reserved rows? Can IANA handle an empty table?
5. Acknowledgements
The members of the NTP Working Group helped a great deal. Notable
contributors include.
* Miroslav Lichvar, RedHat
* Daniel Franke, Akamai Technologies
* Danny Mayer, Network Time Foundation
And thanks to Harlen Stenn for providing popcorn.
6. Normative References
[RFC5905] Mills, D., Martin, J., Ed., Burbank, J., and W. Kasch,
"Network Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms
Specification", RFC 5905, DOI 10.17487/RFC5905, June 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5905>.
[RFC5906] Haberman, B., Ed. and D. Mills, "Network Time Protocol
Version 4: Autokey Specification", RFC 5906,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5906, June 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5906>.
[RFC7821] Mizrahi, T., "UDP Checksum Complement in the Network Time
Protocol (NTP)", RFC 7821, DOI 10.17487/RFC7821, March
2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7821>.
[RFC7822] Mizrahi, T. and D. Mayer, "Network Time Protocol Version 4
(NTPv4) Extension Fields", RFC 7822, DOI 10.17487/RFC7822,
March 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7822>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
[RFC8573] Malhotra, A. and S. Goldberg, "Message Authentication Code
for the Network Time Protocol", RFC 8573,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8573, June 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8573>.
Salz Expires 11 July 2021 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft The update registries draft January 2021
[RFC8915] Franke, D., Sibold, D., Teichel, K., Dansarie, M., and R.
Sundblad, "Network Time Security for the Network Time
Protocol", RFC 8915, DOI 10.17487/RFC8915, September 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8915>.
Author's Address
Rich Salz
Akamai Technologies
Email: rsalz@akamai.com
Salz Expires 11 July 2021 [Page 11]