Network Working Group M. Mikulenas
Internet-Draft Independent
Updates: 1459, 2812 (if approved) D. Oakley
Intended status: Informational ircdocs
Expires: November 30, 2017 May 29, 2017
Internet Relay Chat: Client-to-Client Protocol (CTCP)
draft-oakley-irc-ctcp-00
Abstract
This document describes the Client-to-Client Protocol (CTCP), which
lets Internet Relay Chat (IRC) clients send each other messages that
get displayed or responded to in special ways. CTCP has been widely
implemented, with most clients supporting it natively. This document
outlines how to implement CTCP and the most common messages used.
It updates RFC 1459 and RFC 2812.
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 http://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 November 30, 2017.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 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
(http://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.
Mikulenas & Oakley Expires November 30, 2017 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IRC Client-to-Client Protocol May 2017
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Message Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Message Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Extended formatting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Metadata Query . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3. Extended Query . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Appendix A. Message List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
A.1. ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
A.2. CLIENTINFO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
A.3. DCC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
A.4. FINGER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
A.5. PING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
A.6. SOURCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
A.7. TIME . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
A.8. VERSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
A.9. USERINFO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Introduction
The core Internet Relay Chat (IRC) protocol as described in [RFC1459]
and [RFC2812] only has a single command for regular user messages,
and does not provide a way for clients to exchange information
directly. Client-to-Client Protocol (CTCP) messages let clients
exchange messages that get displayed or responded to in special ways.
Some examples of how CTCP is used is to request special formatting on
messages, query other clients for metadata, and help initiate file
transfers with other clients.
This document goes over the subset of CTCP which is commonly
implemented, and is compatible with clients implementing CTCP as
described by older documents.
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].
Mikulenas & Oakley Expires November 30, 2017 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IRC Client-to-Client Protocol May 2017
2. Message Syntax
CTCP queries are sent with the PRIVMSG IRC command, and CTCP replies
are sent with NOTICE command. To indicate a CTCP query or reply, the
body of the message (the second parameter) begins with the CTCP
delimiter. The ABNF [RFC5234] for this message body is as follows:
delim = %x01
command = 1*( %x02-09 / %x0B-0C / %x0E-1F / %x21-FF )
; any octet except NUL, delim, CR, LF, and " "
params = 1*( %x02-09 / %x0B-0C / %x0E-FF )
; any octet except NUL, delim, CR, and LF
body = delim command [ SPACE params ] [ delim ]
Commands are case-insensitive. When creating new CTCP commands,
authors SHOULD use only alphanumeric characters for ease of
implementation.
The final CTCP delimiter SHOULD be sent on outgoing messages for
compatibility reasons, and software MUST accept incoming messages
which lack it. This is due to how certain clients implement message
splitting and truncation.
Queries MAY be sent to channels. When these queries are responded
to, the responses are sent to the querying client rather than the
channel which the query was originally sent to.
Many servers implement optional filtering so that only the ACTION
CTCP message can be sent to channels. When this is done, it can
typically be enabled or disabled by channel operators with a channel
mode.
Here are two examples of CTCP queries and replies:
:alice PRIVMSG bob :\x01VERSION\x01
:bob NOTICE alice :\x01VERSION Snak for Macintosh 4.13 English\x01
:alice PRIVMSG #ircv3 :\x01PING 1473523796 918320\x01
:bob NOTICE alice :\x01PING 1473523796 918320\x01
3. Message Types
CTCP messages generally take on one of these types. These message
types are defined here to simplify understanding, and aren't
differentiated by the protocol itself.
Mikulenas & Oakley Expires November 30, 2017 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IRC Client-to-Client Protocol May 2017
3.1. Extended formatting
This type of CTCP is used to request special formatting of a user-
visible message. That is, to send a user-visible message that should
be displayed differently from regular messages - e.g. as an action, a
whisper, an announcement.
Extended formatting messages are sent as a PRIVMSG, and are expected
to be used in channels as well as between clients. There is no
automatic response to this message type, as it is not a query nor
reply.
These messages are sent as a PRIVMSG and can have parameters, but
generate no reply.
Example:
:dan PRIVMSG #ircv3 :\x01ACTION writes some specs!\x01
3.2. Metadata Query
This type of CTCP is used to provide relatively static information
about the target client, user or connection.
This CTCP takes the form of a query and a response (as a PRIVMSG and
NOTICE, respectively). Due to how bouncers interact with multiple
clients, there may sometimes be multiple responses to queries.
Metadata queries MUST NOT require the recipient to implement any side
effects (beyond sending the reply itself); if a CTCP message causes
side effects by design, it should be categorized as an extended query
instead.
Metadata queries do not have any parameters, but expect a reply with
parameters as the response data.
Example:
:alice PRIVMSG bob :\x01VERSION\x01
:bob NOTICE alice :\x01VERSION SaberChat 27.5\x01
3.3. Extended Query
This type of CTCP is used to provide dynamic information or invoke
actions from the client.
This CTCP takes the form of a query and a response (as a PRIVMSG and
NOTICE, respectively).
Mikulenas & Oakley Expires November 30, 2017 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IRC Client-to-Client Protocol May 2017
Queries sent to a channel always generate private replies.
Extended queries and replies may have parameters.
Example:
:alice PRIVMSG bob :\x01PING 1473523796 918320\x01
:bob NOTICE alice :\x01PING 1473523796 918320\x01
4. Messages
CTCP messages themselves are not standardised. Clients that receive
either unexpected messages or known messages with unexpected values
SHOULD ignore them and produce no response to the sending user.
Clients MAY receive more than one response per user for a query they
send, due to multiple clients being connected behind an IRC bouncer.
5. Acknowledgements
Thanks to the IRCv3 group for giving feedback on this specification,
and to Khaled for advice on client flood protection.
Thanks to Michael Sandrof for creating CTCP, Troy Rollo for creating
the related DCC protocol, as well as Klaus Zeuge and Ben Mesander who
wrote and revised related specifications.
Special thanks to dequis, Peter Powell and James Wheare for help with
this and related work.
6. Security Considerations
CTCP messages are completely untrusted data, and clients MUST NOT
assume that they are well-formed or complete.
Older CTCP specifications describe quoting methods which are complex
and not widely implemented. Implementations SHOULD NOT implement
"low-level quoting" or "CTCP-level quoting" when parsing messages.
Older CTCP specifications describe including more than one CTCP
message inside a single PRIVMSG or NOTICE command. Implementations
SHOULD NOT implement this form of CTCP parsing as it is not widely-
implemented and may result in an implementation that can be more
easily flooded off the server they are connected to.
CTCP requests can be abused to flood clients off the server they are
connected to. Clients may ignore or delay excessive incoming
requests to protect against this.
Mikulenas & Oakley Expires November 30, 2017 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IRC Client-to-Client Protocol May 2017
7. IANA Considerations
This document has no actions for IANA.
8. Normative References
[RFC1459] Oikarinen, J. and D. Reed, "Internet Relay Chat Protocol",
RFC 1459, DOI 10.17487/RFC1459, May 1993,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1459>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC2812] Kalt, C., "Internet Relay Chat: Client Protocol",
RFC 2812, DOI 10.17487/RFC2812, April 2000,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2812>.
[RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>.
[RFC5322] Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format", RFC 5322,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5322, October 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5322>.
Appendix A. Message List
This section is not exhaustive, and only lists those CTCP messages
which are widely implemented across the IRC ecosystem.
The reply and parameter lines below use a simplified syntax that
represents variables by surrounding them with angle brackets,.
A.1. ACTION
Type: Extended Formatting
Params: ACTION <text>
This extended formatting message shows that <text> should be
displayed as a third-person action or emote; in clients, it's
generally activated with the command "/me".
ACTION is universally implemented and very commonly used. Clients
MUST implement this CTCP message to effectively use IRC.
Mikulenas & Oakley Expires November 30, 2017 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IRC Client-to-Client Protocol May 2017
Example:
Raw: :dan!user@host PRIVMSG #ircv3 :\x01ACTION does it!\x01
Formatted: * dan does it!
A.2. CLIENTINFO
Type: Extended Query
Reply: CLIENTINFO <tokens>
This extended query returns a list of the CTCP messages that this
client supports and implements, delimited by a single ASCII space.
CLIENTINFO is widely implemented. Clients SHOULD implement this CTCP
message.
Example:
Query: CLIENTINFO
Response: CLIENTINFO ACTION DCC CLIENTINFO PING TIME VERSION
A.3. DCC
Type: Extended Query
Params: DCC <type> <argument> <host> <port>
This extended query is used to setup and control connections that go
directly between clients, bypassing the IRC server. This is
typically used for features that require a large amount of traffic
between clients or simply wish to bypass the server itself such as
file transfer and direct chat.
The Direct Client-to-Client (DCC) Protocol requires its own
specification, and is not described in-depth here.
DCC is widely implemented. Clients MAY implement this CTCP message.
A.4. FINGER
Type: Metadata Query
Reply: FINGER <info>
This metadata query returns miscellaneous info about the user,
typically the same information that's held in their realname field.
However, some implementations return the client name and version
instead.
Mikulenas & Oakley Expires November 30, 2017 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IRC Client-to-Client Protocol May 2017
FINGER is largely obsolete. Clients MAY implement this CTCP message.
Example:
Query: FINGER
Response: FINGER WeeChat 1.8-dev
A.5. PING
Type: Extended Query
Params: PING <info>
This extended query is used to confirm reachability with other
clients and to check latency. When receiving a CTCP PING, the reply
MUST contain exactly the same parameters as the original query.
PING is universally implemented. Clients SHOULD implement this CTCP
message.
Example:
Query: PING 1473523721 662865
Response: PING 1473523721 662865
Query: PING foo bar baz
Response: PING foo bar baz
A.6. SOURCE
Type: Metadata Query
Reply: SOURCE <info>
This metadata query is used to return the location of the source code
for the client.
SOURCE is rarely implemented. Clients MAY implement this CTCP
message.
Example:
Query: SOURCE
Response: SOURCE https://weechat.org/download
A.7. TIME
Type: Extended Query
Params: TIME <timestring>
Mikulenas & Oakley Expires November 30, 2017 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IRC Client-to-Client Protocol May 2017
This extended query is used to return the client's local time in an
unspecified human-readable format. In practice, both the format
output by ctime() and the format described in Section 3.3 of
[RFC5322] are common.
New implementations MAY default to UTC time for privacy reasons.
TIME is almost universally implemented. Clients SHOULD implement
this CTCP message.
Example:
Query: TIME
Response: TIME Mon, 08 May 2017 09:15:29 GMT
A.8. VERSION
Type: Metadata Query
Reply: VERSION <verstring>
This metadata query is used to return the name and version of the
client software in use. There is no specified format for the version
string.
Clients may allow users to customise the response value for this
query.
VERSION is universally implemented. Clients SHOULD implement this
CTCP message.
Example:
Query: VERSION
Response: VERSION WeeChat 1.8-dev (git: v1.7-329-g22f2fd03a)
A.9. USERINFO
Type: Metadata Query
Reply: USERINFO <info>
This metadata query returns miscellaneous info about the user,
typically the same information that's held in their realname field.
However, some implementations return "<nickname> (<realname>)"
instead.
USERINFO is largely obsolete. Clients MAY implement this CTCP
message.
Mikulenas & Oakley Expires November 30, 2017 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft IRC Client-to-Client Protocol May 2017
Example:
Query: USERINFO
Response: USERINFO fred (Fred Foobar)
Authors' Addresses
Mantas Mikulenas
Independent
Email: grawity@gmail.com
Daniel Oakley
ircdocs
Email: daniel@danieloaks.net
Mikulenas & Oakley Expires November 30, 2017 [Page 10]