Network Working Group A. Newton
Internet-Draft VeriSign, Inc.
Expires: February 12, 2003 August 14, 2002
Using the Internet Registry Information Service (IRIS) over the
Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol (BEEP)
draft-ietf-crisp-iris-beep
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on February 12, 2003.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
This document specifies how to use the Blocks Extensible Exchange
Protocol (BEEP) as the application transport substrate for the
Internet Registry Information Service (IRIS) as described
draft-ietf-crisp-iris-core-00.txt.
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
Table of Contents
1. Introduction and Motivations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Document Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. BEEP Profile Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. IRIS Message Packages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. IRIS Message Patterns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. URI Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. URI Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. Registrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.1 BEEP Profile Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.2 URI Scheme Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.3 Well-known TCP Port Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9. Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
1. Introduction and Motivations
The proposal in this document describes an IRIS[8] application
transport binding using BEEP[2]. Requirements for IRIS and the
specification in this document are outlined in CRISP[14].
The choice of BEEP as the transport substrate is primarily driven by
the need to re-use an existing, well-understood protocol with all
the necessary features to support the requirements. This gives
implementers a wealth of toolkits and debugging gear for use in
constructing both servers and clients and allows operators to apply
existing experience in issues of deployment. It is also felt that
the construction of a simple application transport for the specific
purpose of IRIS would yield a similar, though likely smaller and
probably less complete, standard after taking into consideration
such matters as framing, authentication, etc.
Precedents for using other transport mechanisms in layered
applications do not seem to fit with the design goals of IRIS.
HTTP[5] offers many features employed for use by similar
applications. However, it is not the intention of IRIS to be put to
such uses as by-passing fire-walls, co-mingling URI schemes, or any
other such methods which might lead to confusion between IRIS and
traditional World Wide Webb applications. Beyond adhering to the
guidelines spelled out in RFC3205[6], the use of HTTP also offers
many other challenges that quickly erode its appeal. For example,
the appropriate use of TLS[4] with HTTP is defined by RFC2817[3],
but the common use as described in RFC2818[10] is usually the only
method in most implementations.
Finally, the straight use of TCP such as that specified by
EPP-TCP[9] does not offer the client negotiation characteristics
needed by a referral application where a single client, in the act
of processing a query, may traverse multiple servers operating with
different parameters.
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
2. Document Terminology
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[7].
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
3. BEEP Profile Identification
The BEEP profile for IRIS is identified with the following URI:
http://iana.org/beep/transient/crisp/iris/1
This URI is used in the "profile" element in BEEP during channel
creation. It contains the version number of the IRIS schema to be
used. According to the rules of BEEP, multiple "profile" elements
may be offered thus allowing for a negotiation of the version of
IRIS to be used. According to the rules of IRIS, this profile maps
to the version of IRIS identified by "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iris1".
Once this profile is accepted and the channel is created, the state
of the channel is considered ready to exchange IRIS messages.
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
4. IRIS Message Packages
The BEEP profile for IRIS transmits XML[1] instances encoded as
UTF-8[13] using the media-type of "application/xml" according to
RFC3023[15].
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
5. IRIS Message Patterns
The BEEP profile for IRIS only has a one-to-one request/response
message pattern. This exchange involves sending an IRIS XML
instance, which results in a response of an IRIS XML instance.
The request is sent by the client using an "MSG" message containing
a valid IRIS XML instance. The server responds with an "RPY" message
containing a valid IRIS XML instance. The "ERR" message is not used
for faults and all responses from the server MUST use the "RPY"
message.
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
6. URI Definition
An IRIS URI[11] has the following general syntax.
iris://<authority>/<registry-id>/<entity-class>/<entity-name>
The full ABNF[12] with certain values included from RFC2396[11]
follows.
iris-uri = "iris://" authority "/" registry-id "/"
entity-class "/" entity-name
authority = // as specified by RFC2396
registry-id = // as specified by IRIS
entity-class = *(unreserved | escaped)
entity-name = *(unreserved | escaped)
reserved = // as specified by RFC2396
escaped = "%" hex hex
hex = "0" | "1" | "2" | "3" | "4" | "5" |
"6" | "7" | "8" | "9" | "A" | "B" |
"C" | "D" | "E" | "F" | "a" | "b" |
"c" | "d" | "e" | "f"
According to the rules in IRIS[8], there is no such thing as a
relative URI for this scheme. In addition, valid URI's with this
scheme MUST always contain a registry ID (namespace identifier), an
entity class, and an entity name. In addition, the entity class and
entity name MUST be encoded using the UTF-8[13] encoding scheme. Any
octet that does not meet the qualification as an unreserved
character according to RFC2396[11] MUST be represented by a "%"
followed by two characters from the <hex> character set above. The
two characters give the hexadecimal representation of that octet.
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
7. URI Resolution
The authority component of an IRIS URI may only contain a domain
name or an IP address accompanied by an optional port number. A
domain name in the authority component MAY NOT be accompanied by a
port number. The authority component of the scheme adheres to the
syntax specified in RFC2396[11], but indicates the server or set of
servers authoritatively responsible for a domain according to
SRV[16] records in DNS if a domain is specified or indicates the
specific server to be queried if an IP address is specified.
The rules for resolution are:
o If the authority component is a domain name, the SRV algorithm is
used with a service parameter of "iris" and a protocol parameter
of "tcp" to determine the IP/TCP addressing information. If no
appropriate SRV RRs are found (e.g., for
"_iris._tcp.example.com"), then the DNS is queried for the A RRs
corresponding to the domain name and the port number used is the
well-known port assigned by the IANA for IRIS using BEEP.
o If the authority component is an IP address, then the DNS is not
queried, and the IP address is used directly. If a port number is
present, it is used directly; otherwise, the port number used is
the well-known port assigned by the IANA for IRIS over BEEP.
Here are some examples of IRIS URI's:
o iris://example.com/dreg/domain/example.com
* Asks a server authoritative for "example.com" about
"example.com".
o iris://com/dreg/domain/example.com
* Asks a server authoritative for "com" about "example.com".
o iris://10.0.1.1:44/dreg/domain/example.com
* Asks the server at IP address 10.0.1.1 on port 44 about the
domain "example.com".
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
8. Registrations
8.1 BEEP Profile Registration
Profile Identification:
http://iana.org/beep/transient/crisp/iris/0.2
Messages exchanged during Channel Creation: none
Messages starting one-to-one exchanges: IRIS XML instance
Messages in positive replies: IRIS XML instance
Messages in negative replies: none
Messages in one-to-many exchanges: none
Message Syntax: IRIS XML instances as defined by IRIS[8].
Message Semantics: request/response exchanges as defined by IRIS[8].
Contact Information: Andrew Newton <anewton@verisignlabs.com>
8.2 URI Scheme Registration
URL scheme name: iris
URL scheme syntax: defined in Section 6.
Character encoding considerations: as defined in RFC2396[11].
Intended usage: identifies an IRIS entity made available using the
BEEP profile for IRIS
Applications using this scheme: defined in IRIS[8].
Interoperability considerations: n/a
Security Considerations: defined in Section 11.
Relevant Publications: BEEP[2] and IRIS[8].
Contact Information: Andrew Newton <anewton@verisignlabs.com>
Author/Change controller: the IESG
8.3 Well-known TCP Port Registration
Protocol Number: TCP
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
Message Formats, Types, Opcodes, and Sequences: defined in Section
3, Section 4, and Section 5.
Functions: defined in IRIS[8].
Use of Broadcast/Multicast: none
Proposed Name: IRIS over BEEP
Short name: iris
Contact Information: Andrew Newton <anewton@verisignlabs.com>
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
9. Internationalization Considerations
URI's are not considered to be internationalized. The topic of
internationalized URI's is beyond the scope of this document and is
not specific to the IRIS URI scheme defined here. It is an issue to
be addressed by a larger scope.
The entity class and entity name components of an IRIS URI is
specified using UTF-8. This has been done for interoperability
purposes.
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
10. IANA Considerations
The IANA will need to be asked to register the IRIS URI scheme. The
IANA will need to assign a standard port number to IRIS over BEEP.
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
11. Security Considerations
This document introduces no known security concerns. However,
implementers should be fully aware of the security considerations
given by IRIS[8], BEEP[2], and TLS[4].
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
References
[1] World Wide Web Consortium, "Extensible Markup Language (XML)
1.0", W3C XML, February 1998,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210>.
[2] Rose, M.T., "The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol Core",
RFC 3080, March 2001.
[3] Khare, R. and S. Lawrence, "Upgrading to TLS Within HTTP/1.1",
RFC 2817, May 2000.
[4] Dierks, T., Allen, C., Treese, W., Karlton, P.L., Freier, A.O.
and P.C. Kocher, "The TLS Protocol Version 1.0", RFC 2246,
January 1999.
[5] Fielding, R.T., Gettys, J., Mogul, J.C., Nielsen, H.F.,
Masinter, L., Leach, P.J. and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext
Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.
[6] Moore, K., "On the use of HTTP as a Substrate", BCP 56, RFC
3205, February 2002.
[7] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, BCP 14, March 1997.
[8] Newton, A, "Internet Registry Information Service",
draft-ietf-crisp-iris-core-00 (work in progress), August 2002.
[9] Hollenbeck, S, "EPP TCP Transport", Internet Draft, a work
in-progress., January 2002.
[10] Rescorla, E., "HTTP Over TLS", RFC 2818, May 2000.
[11] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R.T. and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396, August
1998.
[12] Crocker, D.H. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997.
[13] The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard, Version 2.0",
ISBN 0-201-48345-9 ISBN 0-201-48345-9, January 1988,
<The Unicode Standard, Version 2.0>.
[14] Newton, A, "Cross Registry Internet Service Protocol (CRISP)
Requirements", draft-ietf-crisp-requirements-00 (work in
progress), August 2002.
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
[15] Murata, M., St.Laurent, S. and D. Kohn, "XML Media Types", RFC
3023, January 2001.
[16] Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P. and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for
specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782,
February 2000.
Author's Address
Andrew L. Newton
VeriSign, Inc.
21345 Ridgetop Circle
Sterling, VA 20166
USA
Phone: +1 703 948 3382
EMail: anewton@verisignlabs.com
URI: http://www.verisignlabs.com/
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft iris-beep August 2002
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph
are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Newton Expires February 12, 2003 [Page 17]
