NFSv4 M. Eisler Internet-Draft NetApp Updates: 1833 (if approved) August 19, 2008 Intended status: Standards Track Expires: February 20, 2009 IANA Considerations for RPC Net Identifiers and Universal Address Formats draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpc-netid-03.txt Status of this Memo By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. 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 20, 2009. Abstract This Internet-Draft lists IANA Considerations for RPC Network Identifiers (netids) and RPC Universal Network Addresses (uaddrs). This Internet-Draft updates, but does not replace, RFC1833. Requirements Language 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 RFC 2119 [1]. Eisler Expires February 20, 2009 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft RPC Netids August 2008 Table of Contents 1. Introduction and Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1. IANA Considerations for Netids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1.1. Initial Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1.2. Updating Registrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2. IANA Considerations for Uaddr Formats . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2.1. Initial Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.2.2. Updating Registrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.2.3. Uaddr Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.3. Cross Referencing Between the Netid and Format Registry . 10 4. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Appendix A. RFC Editor Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 13 Eisler Expires February 20, 2009 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft RPC Netids August 2008 1. Introduction and Motivation The concepts of an RPC [4] Network Identifier (netid) and an RPC Universal Address (uaddr) were introduced in [2] for distinguishing network addresses of multiple protocols and representing those addresses in a canonical form. [2] states that a netid ``is defined by a system administrator based on local conventions, and cannot be depended on to have the same value on every system.'' (The netid is contained in the field r_netid of the data type rpcb_entry, and the uaddr is contained in the field r_addr of the same data type, where rpcb_entry is defined in [2].) Since the publication of [2], it has been found to be necessary that protocols like [5] and [6] depend on consistent values of netids and representations of uaddrs. Current practices tend to ensure this consistency. Thus, this document identifies the considerations for IANA to establish registries of netids and uaddr formats for RPC and specifies the initial content of the two registries. 2. Security Considerations See section 9 of [7]. 3. IANA Considerations This section uses terms that are defined in [7]. 3.1. IANA Considerations for Netids IANA will create a registry called "ONC RPC Netids". The remainder of this section describes the registry. All assignments to the ONC RPC Netids registry are made on one of two bases: o First Come First Served basis per section 4.1 of [7]. o Standards Action per section 4.1 of [7]. Netids can be up to 2^32 - 1 octets in length. However, to ensure that practical values for Standards Track protocols are not exhausted, the values of netids one to eight octets long should be used for netids assigned on the Standards Action basis. Assignments made on a First Come First Served basis should be assigned netids of length 9 to 128 octets long. All netids, regardless of length, that start with the prefixes "STDS" or "FCFS" are Reserved, in order to extend the name space of either basis. In addition, to give IESG the Eisler Expires February 20, 2009 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft RPC Netids August 2008 flexibility in the future to permit Private and Experimental Uses, all netids with the prefixes "PRIV" or "EXPE" are Reserved. The zero length netid is Reserved. Some exceptions are listed in Table 2. A recommended convention for netids corresponding to transports that work over the IPv6 protocol is to have "6" as the last character in the netid's name. Since netids are not constructed in an explicit hierarchical manner, this document does not provide for Hierarchical Allocation of netids. Nonetheless, the octet "." in a netid string is Reserved for future possible provision of Hierarchical Allocation. The registry of netids is a list of assignments, each containing five fields for each assignment. 1. A US-ASCII string name that is the actual netid. This name MUST NOT conflict with any other netid. This string name can be 1 to 128 octets long. 2. A constant name that can be used for software programs that wish to use the transport protocol associated with protocol. The name of the constant typically has the prefix: 'NC_', and a suffix equal to the upper case version of the netid. This constant name should be a constant that is valid in the 'C' programming language. This constant name MUST NOT conflict with any other netid constant name. Constant names with the prefix "NC_STDS", "NC_FCFS", "NC_PRIV", or "NC_EXPE" are reserved. Constant names with a prefix of "NC_" and a total length of 11 characters or less should be for assignments made on the Standards Action basis. The constant name can be 1 to 131 octets long. 3. A description and/or a reference to a description of the how the netid will be used. For assignments made on a First Come First Served basis the description should include, if applicable, a reference to the transport and network protocols corresponding to the netid. For assignments made on a Standards Action basis, the description field must include the RFC numbers of the protocol associated with the netid, including if applicable, RFC numbers of the transport and network protocols. This field can be up to 1024 octets. If more space is required, an RFC should be published. 4. A point of contact of the registrant. The point of contact can consume up to 256 octets (or more if IANA permits). For assignments made on a First Come First Served basis, * the point of contact should include an email address. Eisler Expires February 20, 2009 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft RPC Netids August 2008 * subject to authorization by a Designated Expert, the point of contact may be omitted for extraordinary situations, such as the registration of a commonly used netid where the owner is unknown. For assignments made on a Standards Action basis the point of contact is always IESG. 5. A numerical value, used to cross reference the netid assignment with an assignment in the uaddr format registry (see Section 3.2). If the registrant is registering a netid that cross references an existing assignment in the uaddr format registry, then the registrant provides the actual value of the cross reference along with the date the registrant retrieved the cross reference value from the uaddr format registry. If the registrant is registering both a new netid and new uaddr format, then the registrant provides a value of TBD1 in the netid request, and uses TBD1 in the the uaddr format request. IANA will then substitute TBD1 for cross reference number IANA allocates. 3.1.1. Initial Registry The initial list of netids is broken into those assigned on a First Come First Serve basis in Table 1 and those assigned on a Standards Action basis in Table 2. These lists will change when IANA registers additional netids as needed, and the authoritative list of registered netids will always live with IANA. +-------------+--------------+---------------------------+-----+----+ | Netid | Constant | Description and/or | PoC | CR | | | Name | Reference | | | +-------------+--------------+---------------------------+-----+----+ | "-" | NC_NOPROTO | RFC1833 [2], | | 1 | | | | Section 3.2.3.2 of | | | | | | RFCTBD2 | | | | "ticlts" | NC_TICLTS | The loop back | | 0 | | | | connectionless transport | | | | | | used in System V Release | | | | | | 4 and other operating | | | | | | systems. Although this | | | | | | assignment is made on a | | | | | | First Come First Served | | | | | | basis and is fewer than 9 | | | | | | characters long, the | | | | | | exception is authorized. | | | | | | See [8]. | | | Eisler Expires February 20, 2009 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft RPC Netids August 2008 | "ticots" | NC_TICOTS | The loop back | | 0 | | | | connection-oriented | | | | | | transport used in System | | | | | | V Release 4 and other | | | | | | operating systems. See | | | | | | [8]. Although this | | | | | | assignment is made on a | | | | | | First Come First Served | | | | | | basis and is fewer than 9 | | | | | | characters long, the | | | | | | exception is authorized. | | | | "ticotsord" | NC_TICOTSORD | The loop back | | 0 | | | | connection-oriented with | | | | | | orderly-release transport | | | | | | used in System V Release | | | | | | 4 and other operating | | | | | | systems. See [8]. | | | +-------------+--------------+---------------------------+-----+----+ Table 1: Initial First Come First Serve Netid Assignments PoC: Point of Contact. CR: Cross Reference to the Uaddr Format Registry. +---------+--------------+------------------------------+------+----+ | Netid | Constant | RFC(s) and Description (if | PoC | CR | | | Name | needed) | | | +---------+--------------+------------------------------+------+----+ | "dccp" | NC_DCCP | RFC4340 [9] RFC0760 [10] | IESG | 2 | | "dccp6" | NC_DCCP6 | RFC4340 [9] RFC2460 [11] | IESG | 3 | | "icmp" | NC_ICMP | RFC0777 [12] RFC0760 [10] | IESG | 4 | | "icmp6" | NC_ICMP6 | RFC0777 [12] RFC2460 [11] | IESG | 4 | | "rdma" | NC_RDMA | RFCTBD1 [6] RFC0760 [10] | IESG | 2 | | "rdma6" | NC_RDMA6 | RFCTBD1 [6] RFC2460 [11] | IESG | 3 | | "sctp" | NC_SCTP | RFC2960 [13] RFC0760 [10] | IESG | 2 | | "sctp6" | NC_SCTP6 | RFC2960 [13] RFC2460 [11] | IESG | 3 | | "tcp" | NC_TCP | RFC0675 [14] RFC0760 [10] | IESG | 2 | | "tcp6" | NC_TCP6 | RFC0675 [14] RFC2460 [11] | IESG | 3 | | "udp" | NC_UDP | RFC0768 [15] RFC0760 [10] | IESG | 2 | | "udp6" | NC_UDP6 | RFC0768 [15] RFC2460 [11] | IESG | 3 | +---------+--------------+------------------------------+------+----+ Table 2: Initial Standards Action Netid Assignments Eisler Expires February 20, 2009 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft RPC Netids August 2008 3.1.2. Updating Registrations Per section 5.2 of [7] the registrant is always permitted to update a registration made on a First Come First Served basis "subject to the same constraints and review as with new registrations." IESG or a Designated Expert is permitted to update any registration made on a First Come First Served basis, which normally is done when the PoC cannot be reached in order to make necessary updates. Examples where an update would be needed include, but are not limited to: the email address or other contact information becomes invalid; the reference to the corresponding protocol becomes obsolete or unavailable; and RFC1833 [2] is updated or replaced in such a way that the scope of netids changes, requiring additional fields in the assignment. Only IESG, on the advice of a Designated Expert, can update a registration made on a Standards Action basis. 3.2. IANA Considerations for Uaddr Formats IANA will create a registry called "ONC RPC Uaddr Format Registry" (called the "format registry" for the remainder of this document). The remainder of this section describes the registry. All assignments to the format registry are made on one of two bases: o First Come First Served basis per section 4.1 of [7]. o Standards Action per section 4.1 of [7]. The registry of formats is a list of assignments, each containing four fields for each assignment. 1. The basis for the assignment, which can be either FCFS for First Come First Served assignments, or STDS for Standards Action assignments. 2. A description and/or reference to a description of the actual uaddr format. Assignments made on a Standards Action basis always have a reference to an RFC. This field can be up to 1024 octets. If more space is required, an RFC should be published. 3. For assignments made on a First Come First Served basis, a point of contact, including an email address. The point of contact can consume up to 256 octets (or more if IANA permits). Subject to authorization by a Designated Expert, the point of contact may be omitted for extraordinary situations, such as the registration of a commonly used format where the owner is unknown. For assignments made on a Standards Action basis the point of contact Eisler Expires February 20, 2009 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft RPC Netids August 2008 is always IESG. 4. A numerical value, used to cross reference the format assignment with an assignment in the netid registry. The registrant provides a value of TBD1 for the cross reference filed when requesting an assignment. IANA will assign TBD1 to a real value. All requests for assignments to the format registry must undergo Expert Review. All requests for assignments made on a Standards Action basis must be approved by IESG. 3.2.1. Initial Registry The initial list of formats is in Table 3. This lists will change when IANA registers additional formats as needed, and the authoritative list of registered formats will always live with IANA. +-------+-----------------------------------------------+------+----+ | Basis | Description and/or Reference | PoC | CR | +-------+-----------------------------------------------+------+----+ | FCFS | System V Release 4 loopback transport uaddr | | 0 | | | format. Section 3.2.3.1 of RFCTBD2 | | | | FCFS | Uaddr format for NC_NOPROTO. Section 3.2.3.2 | | 1 | | | of RFCTBD2 | | | | STDS | Uaddr format for IPv4 transports. | IESG | 2 | | | Section 3.2.3.3 of RFCTBD2 | | | | STDS | Uaddr format for IPv6 transports. | IESG | 3 | | | Section 3.2.3.4 of RFCTBD2 | | | | STDS | Uaddr formation for ICMP. Section 3.2.3.5 of | IESG | 4 | | | RFCTBD2 | | | +-------+-----------------------------------------------+------+----+ Table 3: Initial Format Assignments 3.2.2. Updating Registrations The registrant is always permitted to update a registration made on a First Come First Served basis "subject to the same constraints and review as with new registrations.", but as with new registrations, any requested changes to any field other the point of contact requires Expert Review. IESG or a Designated Expert is permitted to update any registration made on a First Come First Served basis, which normally is done when the PoC cannot be reached in order to make necessary updates. Examples where an update would be needed include, but are not limited to: the email address or other contact information becomes invalid; the reference to the format description becomes obsolete or unavailable; and RFC1833 [2] is updated or replaced in such a way that the scope of uaddr formats changes, Eisler Expires February 20, 2009 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft RPC Netids August 2008 requiring additional fields in the assignment. Only IESG, on the advice of a Designated Expert, can update a registration made on a Standards Action basis. 3.2.3. Uaddr Formats 3.2.3.1. Uaddr Format for System V Release 4 Loopback Transports Although [2] identifies the uaddr as data type string (hence, limited to US-ASCII), implementations of the System V Release 4 loopback transports will use an opaque string of octets. Thus format of a loopback transport address is any non-zero length array of octets. 3.2.3.2. Uaddr Format for Netid "-" There is no address format for netid "-". This netid is apparently for internal use for supporting some implementations of [2]. 3.2.3.3. Uaddr Format for Most IPv4 Transports Most transport protocols that operate over IPv4 use 16 bit port numbers, including DCCP [9], RDMA [6], SCTP [13], TCP [14], and UDP [15]. The format of the uaddr for the above 16 bit port transports (when used over IPv4) is the US-ASCII string: h1.h2.h3.h4.p1.p2 The prefix, "h1.h2.h3.h4", is the standard textual form for representing an IPv4 address, which is always four octets long. Assuming big-endian ordering, h1, h2, h3, and h4, are respectively, the first through fourth octets each converted to ASCII-decimal. The suffix, "p1.p2", is a textual form for representing a service port. Assuming big-endian ordering, p1 and p2 are, respectively, the first and second octets each converted to ASCII-decimal. For example, if a host, in big-endian order, has an address in hexadecimal of 0xC0000207 and there is a service listening on, in big endian order, port 0xCB51 (decimal 52049) then the complete uaddr is "192.0.2.7.203.81". 3.2.3.4. Uaddr Format for Most IPv6 Transports Most transport protocols that operate over IPv6 use 16 bit port numbers, including DCCP [9], RDMA [6], SCTP [13], TCP [14], and UDP [15]. The format of the uaddr for the above 16 bit port transports (when used over IPv6) is the US-ASCII string: Eisler Expires February 20, 2009 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft RPC Netids August 2008 x1:x2:x3:x4:x5:x6:x7:x8.p1.p2 The suffix "p1.p2" is the service port, and is computed the same way as with uaddrs for transports over IPv4 (see Section 3.2.3.3). The prefix, "x1:x2:x3:x4:x5:x6:x7:x8", is the preferred textual form for representing an IPv6 address as defined in Section 2.2 of [3]. Additionally, the two alternative forms specified in Section 2.2 of [3] are also acceptable. 3.2.3.5. Uaddr Format for ICMP over IPv4 and IPv6 As ICMP is not a true transport, there is no uaddr format for ICMP. The netid assignments "icmp" and "icmp6" and their shared uaddr "format" are listed to prevent any registrant from allocating the netids "icmp" and "icmp6" for a purpose that would likely cause confusion. 3.3. Cross Referencing Between the Netid and Format Registry The last field of the netids registry is used to cross reference with the last field of the format registry. IANA is under no obligation to maintain same numeric value in cross references when updating each registry; i.e. IANA is free to "re-number" these corresponding fields. However, if IANA does so, both the netid and format registries must be updated atomically. 4. References 4.1. Normative References [1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997. [2] Srinivasan, R., "Binding Protocols for ONC RPC Version 2", RFC 1833, August 1995. [3] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006. 4.2. Informative References [4] Srinivasan, R., "RPC: Remote Procedure Call Protocol Specification Version 2", RFC 1831, August 1995. [5] Shepler, S., Callaghan, B., Robinson, D., Thurlow, R., Beame, C., Eisler, M., and D. Noveck, "Network File System (NFS) version 4 Protocol", RFC 3530, April 2003. Eisler Expires February 20, 2009 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft RPC Netids August 2008 [6] Talpey, T. and B. Callaghan, "Remote Direct Memory Access Transport for Remote Procedure Call", draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcrdma-08 (work in progress), April 2008. [7] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, May 2008. [8] American Telephone and Telegraph Company, "UNIX System V, Release 4 Programmer's Guide: Networking Interfaces, ISBN 0139470786", 1990. [9] Kohler, E., Handley, M., and S. Floyd, "Datagram Congestion Control Protocol (DCCP)", RFC 4340, March 2006. [10] Postel, J., "DoD standard Internet Protocol", RFC 760, January 1980. [11] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998. [12] Postel, J., "Internet Control Message Protocol", RFC 777, April 1981. [13] Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Morneault, K., Sharp, C., Schwarzbauer, H., Taylor, T., Rytina, I., Kalla, M., Zhang, L., and V. Paxson, "Stream Control Transmission Protocol", RFC 2960, October 2000. [14] Cerf, V., Dalal, Y., and C. Sunshine, "Specification of Internet Transmission Control Program", RFC 675, December 1974. [15] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768, August 1980. Appendix A. RFC Editor Notes [RFC Editor: please remove this section prior to publication.] [RFC Editor: Please replace occurrences of RFCTBD1 with the RFCxxxx where xxxx is the RFC number assigned to the document referenced in [6].] [RFC Editor: Please replace occurrences of RFCTBD2 with the RFCyyyy where yyyy is the RFC number assigned to this document.] Eisler Expires February 20, 2009 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft RPC Netids August 2008 Author's Address Mike Eisler NetApp 5765 Chase Point Circle Colorado Springs, CO 80919 US Phone: +1-719-599-9026 Email: mike@eisler.com Eisler Expires February 20, 2009 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft RPC Netids August 2008 Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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. Intellectual Property The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. Eisler Expires February 20, 2009 [Page 13]
