<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd">

<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>
<?rfc strict="yes"?>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="3"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>

<rfc category="info" docName="draft-ietf-ntp-roughtime-00" ipr="trust200902">
  <front>
    <title>Roughtime</title>

    <author fullname="Aanchal Malhotra" initials="A." surname="Malhotra">
      <organization>Boston University</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>111 Cummington Mall</street>
          <city>Boston</city>
          <region></region>
          <code>02215</code>
          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>
        <email>aanchal4@bu.edu</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Adam Langley" initials="A." surname="Langley">
      <organization>Google </organization>
      <address>
	<email>
	agl@google.com </email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Watson Ladd" initials="W." surname="Ladd">
      <organization> Cloudflare</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>101 Townsend St</street>
          <city>San Francisco</city>
          <region></region>
          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>
        <email>watsonbladd@gmail.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <date year="2020" month="January" day="27"/>

    <area>General</area>

    <workgroup>Internet Engineering Task Force</workgroup>
    
    <keyword>roughtime</keyword>

    <keyword>time synchronization</keyword>

    <abstract>
      <t>
        This document specifies Roughtime - a protocol that aims to achieve
        rough time synchronization while detecting servers that provide
        inaccurate time and providing cryptographic proof of their malfeasance.
      </t>
    </abstract>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <section title="Introduction">
      <t>
        Time synchronization is essential to Internet security as many security
        protocols and other applications require synchronization
        <xref target="RFC7384"/> <xref target="MCBG"/>. Unfortunately widely
        deployed protocols such as the Network Time Protocol (NTP)
        <xref target="RFC5905"/> lack essential security features, and even
        newer protocols like Network Time Security (NTS)
        <xref target="I-D.ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp"/> fail to ensure that the
        servers behave correctly. Authenticating time servers prevents network
        adversaries from modifying time packets, but an authenticated time
        server still has full control over the contents of the time packet and
        may go rogue. The Roughtime protocol provides cryptographic proof of
        malfeasance, enabling clients to detect and prove to a third party a
        server's attempts to influence the time a client computes.
      </t>
      <texttable anchor="existing_approaches">
        <ttcol align='center'>Protocol</ttcol>
        <ttcol align='center'>Authenticated Server</ttcol>
        <ttcol align='center'>Server Malfeasance Evidence</ttcol>
        <c>NTP, Chronos</c> <c>N</c>   <c>N</c>
        <c>NTP-MD5</c>      <c>Y*</c>  <c>N</c>
        <c>NTP-Autokey</c>  <c>Y**</c> <c>N</c>
        <c>NTS</c>          <c>Y</c>   <c>N</c>
        <c>Roughtime</c>    <c>Y</c>   <c>Y</c>
        <postamble>Security Properties of current protocols</postamble>
      </texttable>
      <t>
        Y* For security issues with symmetric-key based NTP-MD5 authentication,
        please refer to <xref target="RFC8573">RFC 8573</xref>.
      </t>
      <t>
        Y** For security issues with Autokey Public Key Authentication, refer to
        <xref target="Autokey"/>.
      </t>
      <t>
        More specifically,
      </t>
      <t>
        <list style="symbols">
          <t>
            If a server's timestamps do not fit into the time context of other
            servers' responses, then a Roughtime client can cryptographically
            prove this misbehavior to third parties. This helps detect "bad"
            servers.
          </t>
          <t>
            A Roughtime client can roughly detect (with no absolute guarantee) a
            delay attack <xref target="DelayAttacks"/> but can not
            cryptographically prove this to a third party. However, the absence
            of proof of malfeasance should not be considered a proof of absence
            of malfeasance. So Roughtime should not be used as a witness that a
            server is overall "good".
          </t>
          <t>
            Note that delay attacks cannot be detected/stopped by any protocol.
            Delay attacks can not, however, undermine the security guarantees
            provided by Roughtime.
          </t>
          <t>
            Although delay attacks cannot be prevented, they can be limited to
            a predetermined upper bound. This can be done by defining a
            maximal tolerable Round Trip Time (RTT) value, MAX-RTT, that a
            Roughtime client is willing to accept. A Roughtime client can
            measure the RTT of every request-response handshake and compare it
            to MAX-RTT. If the RTT exceeds MAX-RTT, the corresponding server
            is assumed to be a falseticker. When this approach is used the
            maximal time error that can be caused by a delay attack is
            MAX-RTT/2. It should be noted that this approach assumes that the
            nature of the system is known to the client, including reasonable
            upper bounds on the RTT value.
          </t>
        </list>
      </t>
    </section>

    <section title="Requirements Language">
      <t>
        The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
        "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
        "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14
        <xref target="RFC2119"></xref> <xref target="RFC8174"></xref> when, and
        only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.
      </t>
    </section>

    <section title="Protocol Overview" anchor="protocol-overview">
      <t>
        Roughtime is a protocol for rough time synchronization that enables
        clients to provide cryptographic proof of server malfeasance. It does so
        by having responses from servers include a signature with a certificate
        rooted in a long-term public/private key pair over a value derived from
        a nonce provided by the client in its request. This provides
        cryptographic proof that the timestamp was issued after the server
        received the client's request. The derived value included in the
        server's response is the root of a Merkle tree which includes the hash
        of the client's nonce as the value of one of its leaf nodes. This
        enables the server to amortize the relatively costly signing operation
        over a number of client requests.
      </t>
      <t>
        Single server mode: At its most basic level, Roughtime is a one round
        protocol in which a completely fresh client requests the current time
        and the server sends a signed response. The response includes a
        timestamp and a radius used to indicate the server's certainty about the
        reported time. For example, a radius of 1,000,000 microseconds means the
        server is absolutely confident that the true time is within one second
        of the reported time.
      </t>
      <t>
        The server proves freshness of its response as follows: The client's
        request contains a nonce. The server incorporates the nonce into its
        signed response so that the client can verify the server's signatures
        covering the nonce issued by the client. Provided that the nonce has
        sufficient entropy, this proves that the signed response could only have
        been generated after the nonce.
      </t>
      <t>
        Chaining multiple servers: For subsequent requests, the client generates
        a new nonce by hashing the reply from the previous server with a random
        value (a blind). This proves that the nonce was created after the reply
        from the previous server. It sends the new nonce in a request to the
        next server and receives a response that includes a signature covering
        the nonce.
      </t>
      <t>
        Cryptographic proof of misbehavior: If the time from the second server
        is before the first, then the client has proof that at least one of the
        servers is misbehaving; the reply from the second server implicitly
        shows that it was created later because of the way that the client
        constructed the nonce. If the time from the second server is too far in
        the future, the client can contact the first server again with a new
        nonce generated from the second server's response and get a signature
        that was provably created afterwards, but with an earlier timestamp.
      </t>
      <t>
        With only two servers, the client can end up with proof that something
        is wrong, but no idea what the correct time is. But with half a dozen or
        more independent servers, the client will end up with chain of proof of
        any server's misbehavior, signed by several others, and (presumably)
        enough accurate replies to establish what the correct time is.
        Furthermore, this proof may be validated by third parties ultimately
        leading to a revocation of trust in the misbehaving server.
      </t>
    </section>

    <section title="The guarantee">
      <t>
        A Roughtime server guarantees that a response to a query sent
        at t_1, received at t_2, and with timestamp t_3 has been
        created between the transmission of the query and its
        reception. If t_3 is not within that interval, a server
        inconsistency may be detected and used to impeach the
        server. The propagation of such a guarantee and its use of
        type synchronization is discussed in <xref target="ntp-integration"/>. No delay attacker may affect this:
        they may only expand the interval between t_1 and t_2, or of
        course stop the measurement in the first place.
      </t>
    </section>

    <section title="Message Format">
      <t>
        Roughtime messages are maps consisting of one or more (tag, value)
        pairs. They start with a header, which contains the number of pairs, the
        tags, and value offsets. The header is followed by a message values
        section which contains the values associated with the tags in the
        header. Messages MUST be formatted according to
        <xref target="fig-roughtime-message"/> as described in the following
        sections.
      </t>
      <t>
        Messages may be recursive, i.e. the value of a tag can itself be a
        Roughtime message.
      </t>
      <figure anchor="fig-roughtime-message" title="Roughtime Message Format">
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 0                   1                   2                   3
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                   Number of pairs (uint32)                    |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                                                               |
.                                                               .
.                     N-1 offsets (uint32)                      .
.                                                               .
|                                                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                                                               |
.                                                               .
.                        N tags (uint32)                        .
.                                                               .
|                                                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                                                               |
.                                                               .
.                            Values                             .
.                                                               .
|                                                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]>
        </artwork>
      </figure>

      <section title="Data Types">
        <section title="uint32">
          <t>
            A uint32 is a 32 bit unsigned integer. It is serialized with the
            least significant byte first.
          </t>
        </section>

        <section title="uint64">
          <t>
            A uint64 is a 64 bit unsigned integer. It is serialized with the
            least significant byte first.
          </t>
        </section>

        <section title="Tag" anchor="tag">
          <t>
            Tags are used to identify values in Roughtime packets. A tag is a
            uint32 but may also be listed as a sequence of up to four ASCII
            characters <xref target="RFC0020"/>. ASCII strings shorter than four
            characters can be unambiguously converted to tags by padding them
            with zero bytes. For example, the ASCII string "NONC" would
            correspond to the tag 0x434e4f4e and "PAD" would correspond to
            0x00444150.
          </t>
        </section>

        <section title="Timestamp">
          <t>
            A timestamp is a uint64 interpreted in the following way. The most
            significant 3 bytes contain the integer part of a Modified Julian
            Date (MJD). The least significant 5 bytes is a count of the number
            of Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) microseconds
            <xref target="ITU-R_TF.460-6"/> since midnight on that day.
          </t>
          <t>
            The MJD is the number of UTC days since 17 November 1858
            <xref target="ITU-R_TF.457-2"/>.
          </t>
          <t>
            Note that, unlike NTP, this representation does not use the full
            number of bits in the fractional part and that days with leap
            seconds will have more or fewer than the nominal 86,400,000,000
            microseconds.
          </t>
        </section>
      </section>

      <section title="Header">
        <t>
          All Roughtime messages start with a header. The first four bytes of
          the header is the uint32 number of tags N, and hence of (tag, value)
          pairs. The following 4*(N-1) bytes are offsets, each a uint32. The
          last 4*N bytes in the header are tags.
        </t>
        <t>
          Offsets refer to the positions of the values in the message values
          section. All offsets MUST be multiples of four and placed in
          increasing order. The first post-header byte is at offset 0. The
          offset array is considered to have a not explicitly encoded value of 0
          as its zeroth entry. The value associated with the ith tag begins at
          offset[i] and ends at offset[i+1]-1, with the exception of the last
          value which ends at the end of the packet. Values may have zero
          length.
        </t>
        <t>
          Tags MUST be listed in the same order as the offsets of their values.
          A tag MUST NOT appear more than once in a header.
        </t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="Protocol">
      <t>
        Roughtime messages are sent between clients and servers as UDP packets, or
	over TCP. When transporting over TCP, the packets are prefixed with their
	length as a uint32. Currently no servers exist for the TCP version.
        As described in <xref target="protocol-overview"/>, clients initiate
        time synchronization by sending request packets containing a nonce to
        servers who send signed time responses in return.
      </t>

      <section title="Requests">
        <t>
          A request is a Roughtime message with the tag NONC. The size of the
          request message SHOULD be at least 1024 bytes. To attain this size the
          PAD tag SHOULD be added to the message. Tags other than NONC SHOULD be
          ignored by the server. Responding to requests shorter than 1024 bytes
          is OPTIONAL and servers MUST NOT send responses larger than the
          requests they are replying to.
        </t>
        <t>
          The value of the NONC tag is a 64 byte nonce. It SHOULD be generated
          by hashing a previous Roughtime response message together with a blind
          as described in <xref target="cheater-detection"/>. If no previous
          responses are avaiable to the client, the nonce SHOULD be generated at
          random.
        </t>
        <t>
          The PAD tag SHOULD be used by clients to ensure their request messages
          are at least 1024 bytes in size. Its value SHOULD be all zeros.
        </t>
      </section>

      <section title="Responses">
        <t>
          A response contains the tags SREP, SIG, CERT, INDX, and PATH. The SIG
          tag is a signature over the SREP value using the public key contained
          in CERT, as explained below.
        </t>
        <t>
          The SREP tag contains a time response. Its value is a Roughtime
          message with the tags ROOT, MIDP, and RADI.
        </t>
        <t>
          The ROOT tag contains a 32 byte value of a Merkle tree root as
          described in <xref target="merkle-tree"/>.
        </t>
        <t>
          The MIDP tag value is a timestamp of the moment of processing.
        </t>
        <t>
          The RADI tag value is a uint32 representing the server's estimate of
          the accuracy of MIDP in microseconds. Servers MUST ensure that the
          true time is within (MIDP-RADI, MIDP+RADI) at the time they compose
          the response packet.
        </t>
        <t>
          The SIG tag value is a 64 byte Ed25519 signature
          <xref target="RFC8032"/> over a signature context concatenated with
          the entire value of a DELE or SREP tag. Signatures of DELE tags use
          the ASCII string "RoughTime v1 delegation signature--" and signatures
          of SREP tags use the ASCII string "RoughTime v1 response signature" as
          signature context. Both strings include a terminating zero byte.
        </t>
        <t>
          The CERT tag contains a public-key certificate signed with the
          server's long-term key. Its value is a Roughtime message with the tags
          DELE and SIG, where SIG is a signature over the DELE value.
        </t>
        <t>
          The DELE tag contains a delegated public-key certificate used by the
          server to sign the SREP tag. Its value is a Roughtime message with the
          tags MINT, MAXT, and PUBK. The purpose of the DELE tag is to enable
          separation of a long-term public key from keys on devices exposed to
          the public Internet.
        </t>
        <t>
          The MINT tag is the minimum timestamp for which the key in PUBK is
          trusted to sign responses. MIDP MUST be more than or equal to MINT for
          a response to be considered valid.
        </t>
        <t>
          The MAXT tag is the maximum timestamp for which the key in PUBK is
          trusted to sign responses. MIDP MUST be less than or equal to MAXT for
          a response to be considered valid.
        </t>
        <t>
          The PUBK tag contains a temporary 32 byte Ed25519 public key which is
          used to sign the SREP tag.
        </t>
        <t>
          The INDX tag value is a uint32 determining the position of NONC in the
          Merkle tree used to generate the ROOT value as described in
          <xref target="merkle-tree"/>.
        </t>
        <t>
          The PATH tag value is a multiple of 32 bytes long and represents a
          path of 32 byte hash values in the Merkle tree used to generate the
          ROOT value as described in <xref target="merkle-tree"/>. In the case
          where a response is prepared for a single request and the Merkle tree
          contains only the root node, the size of PATH is zero.
        </t>
      </section>

      <section title="The Merkle Tree" anchor="merkle-tree">
        <t>
          A Merkle tree is a binary tree where the value of each non-leaf node
          is a hash value derived from its two children. The root of the tree is
          thus dependent on all leaf nodes.
        </t>
        <t>
          In Roughtime, each leaf node in the Merkle tree represents the nonce
          of one request that a response message is sent in reply to. Leaf nodes
          are indexed left to right, beginning with zero.
        </t>
        <t>
          The values of all nodes are calculated from the leaf nodes and up
          towards the root node using the first 32 bytes of the output of the
          SHA-512 hash algorithm <xref target="RFC6234"/>. For leaf nodes, the
          byte 0x00 is prepended to the nonce before applying the hash function.
          For all other nodes, the byte 0x01 is concatenated with first the left
          and then the right child node value before applying the hash function.
        </t>
        <t>
          The value of the Merkle tree's root node is included in the ROOT tag
          of the response.
        </t>
        <t>
          The index of a request's nonce node is included in the INDX tag of the
          response.
        </t>
        <t>
          The values of all sibling nodes in the path between a request's nonce
          node and the root node is stored in the PATH tag so that the client
          can reconstruct and validate the value in the ROOT tag using its
          nonce.
        </t>

        <section title="Root value validity check algorithm"
            anchor="root-check">
          <t>
            One starts by computing the hash of the NONC value from the request,
            with 0x00 prepended. Then one walks from the least significant bit
            of INDX to the most significant bit, and also walks towards the end
            of PATH.
          </t>
          <t>
            If PATH ends then the remaining bits of the INDX MUST be all zero.
            This indicates the termination of the walk, and the current value
            MUST equal ROOT if the response is valid.
          </t>
          <t>
            If the current bit is 0, one hashes 0x01, the current hash, and the
            value from PATH to derive the next current value.
          </t>
          <t>
            If the current bit is 1 one hashes 0x01, the value from PATH, and
            the current hash to derive the next current value.
          </t>
        </section>
      </section>

      <section title="Validity of response">
        <t>
          A client MUST check the following properties when it receives a
          response. We assume the long-term server public key is known to the
          client through other means.

          <list style="symbols">
            <t>
              The signature in CERT was made with the long-term key of the
              server.
            </t>
            <t>
              The DELE timestamps and the MIDP value are consistent.
            </t>
            <t>
              The INDX and PATH values prove NONC was included in the Merkle
              tree with value ROOT using the algorithm in
              <xref target="root-check"/>.
            </t>
            <t>
              The signature of SREP in SIG validates with the public key in
              DELE.
            </t>
          </list>

          A response that passes these checks is said to be valid. Validity of a
          response does not prove the time is correct, but merely that the
          server signed it, and thus guarantees that it began to compute the
          signature at a time in the interval (MIDP-RADI, MIDP+RADI).
        </t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section title = "Integration into ntp" anchor="ntp-integration">
      <t>
        We assume that there is a bound PHI on the frequency error in
        the clock on the machine. Given a measurement taken at a local
        time t1, we know the true time is in [ t1-delta-sigma,
        t1-delta+sigma ]. After d seconds have elapsed we know the true
        time is within [ t1-delta-sigma-d*PHI, t1-delta+sigma+d*PHI]. A
        simple and effective way to mix with NTP or PTP discipline of
        the clock is to trim the observed intervals in NTP to fit
        entirely within this window or reject measurements that fall
        to far outside. This assumes time has not been stepped.  If
        the NTP process decides to step the time, it MUST use
        roughtime to ensure the new truetime estimate that will be
        stepped to is consistent with the true time.</t>

        <t>Should this window become too large, another roughtime
        measurement is called for. The definition of "too large" is
        implementation defined.</t>

        <t>Implementations MAY use other, more sophisticated means of
        adjusting the clock respecting roughtime information.</t>
    </section>
    <section title="Cheater Detection" anchor="cheater-detection">
      <t>
        A chain of responses is a series of responses where the SHA-512 hash of
        the preceding response H, is concatenated with a 64 byte blind X, and
        then SHA-512(H, X) is the nonce used in the subsequent response. These
        may be represented as an array of objects in JavaScript Object Notation
        (JSON) format <xref target="RFC8259"/> where each object may have keys
        "blind" and "response_packet". Packet has the Base64
        <xref target="RFC4648"/> encoded bytes of the packet and blind is the
        Base64 encoded blind used for the next nonce. The last packet needs no
        blind.
      </t>
      <t>
        A pair of responses (r_1, r_2) is invalid if MIDP_1-RADI_1 &gt;
        MIDP_2+RADI_2. A chain of longer length is invalid if for any i, j such
        that i &lt; j, (r_i, r_j) is an invalid pair.
      </t>
      <t>
        Invalidity of a chain is proof that causality has been violated if all
        servers were reporting correct time. An invalid chain where all
        individual responses are valid is cryptographic proof of malfeasance of
        at least one server: if all servers had the correct time in the chain,
        causality would imply that MIDP_1-RADI_1 &lt; MIDP_2+RADI_2.
      </t>
      <t>
        In conducting the comparison of timestamps one must know the length of a
        day and hence have historical leap second data for the days in question.
        However if violations are greater then a second the loss of leap second
        data doesn't impede their detection.
      </t>
    </section>

    <section title="Grease">
      <t>
        Servers MAY send back a fraction of responses that are syntactically
        invalid or contain invalid signatures as well as incorrect times.
        Clients MUST properly reject such responses. Servers MUST NOT send back
        responses with incorrect times and valid signatures. Either signature
        MAY be invalid for this application.
      </t>
    </section>

    <section title="Roughtime Servers">
      <t>
        The below list contains a list of servers with their public keys in
        Base64 format. These servers may implement older versions of this
        specification.
        <figure>
          <artwork>
address:       roughtime.cloudflare.com
port:          2002
long-term key: gD63hSj3ScS+wuOeGrubXlq35N1c5Lby/S+T7MNTjxo=

address:       roughtime.int08h.com
port:          2002
long-term key: AW5uAoTSTDfG5NfY1bTh08GUnOqlRb+HVhbJ3ODJvsE=

address:       roughtime.sandbox.google.com
port:          2002
long-term key: etPaaIxcBMY1oUeGpwvPMCJMwlRVNxv51KK/tktoJTQ=

address:       roughtime.se
port:          2002
long-term key: S3AzfZJ5CjSdkJ21ZJGbxqdYP/SoE8fXKY0+aicsehI=
          </artwork>
        </figure>
      </t>
    </section>

    <section title="Trust anchors and policies">
      <t>
        A trust anchor is any distributor of a list of trusted servers. It is
        RECOMMENDED that trust anchors subscribe to a common public forum where
        evidence of malfeasance may be shared and discussed. Trust anchors
        SHOULD subscribe to a zero-tolerance policy: any generation of incorrect
        timestamps will result in removal. To enable this trust anchors SHOULD
        list a wide variety of servers so the removal of a server does not
        result in operational issues for clients. Clients SHOULD attempt to
        detect malfeasance and have a way to report it to trust anchors.
      </t>
      <t>
        Because only a single roughtime server is required for successful
        synchronization, Roughtime does not have the incentive problems that
        have prevented effective enforcement of discipline on the web PKI. We
        expect that some clients will aggressively monitor server behavior.
      </t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="Acknowledgements" title="Acknowledgements">
      <t>
        Thomas Peterson corrected multiple nits. Marcus Dansarie, Peter
        L&ouml;thberg (Lothberg), Tal Mizrahi, Ragnar Sundblad, Kristof
        Teichel, and the other members of the NTP working group contributed
        comments and suggestions.
      </t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="IANA" title="IANA Considerations">
      <section title="Service Name and Transport Protocol Port Number Registry">
        <t>
          IANA is requested to allocate the following entry in the
          <xref target="RFC6335">Service Name and Transport Protocol
          Port Number Registry</xref>:
          <list>
            <t>Service Name: Roughtime</t>
            <t>Transport Protocol: udp</t>
            <t>Assignee: IESG &lt;iesg@ietf.org&gt;</t>
            <t>Contact: IETF Chair &lt;chair@ietf.org&gt;</t>
            <t>Description: Roughtime time synchronization</t>
            <t>Reference: [[this memo]]</t>
            <t>Port Number: [[TBD1]], selected by IANA from the User Port
              range</t>
          </list>
        </t>
      </section>

      <section title="Roughtime Tag Registry">
        <t>
          IANA is requested to create a new registry entitled
          &quot;Roughtime Tag Registry&quot;. Entries SHALL have
          the following fields:
          <list>
            <t>
              Tag (REQUIRED): A 32-bit unsigned integer in hexadecimal format.
            </t>
            <t>
              ASCII Representation (OPTIONAL): The ASCII representation of the
              tag in accordance with <xref target="tag"/> of this memo, if
              applicable.
            </t>
            <t>
              Reference (REQUIRED): A reference to a relevant specification
              document.
            </t>
          </list>
          The policy for allocation of new entries in this registry
          SHOULD be: Specification Required.
        </t>
        <t>
          The initial contents of this registry SHALL be as follows:
        </t>
        <texttable>
          <ttcol>Tag</ttcol>
          <ttcol>ASCII Representation</ttcol>
          <ttcol>Reference</ttcol>

          <c>0x00444150</c>
          <c>PAD</c>
          <c>[[this memo]]</c>

          <c>0x00474953</c>
          <c>SIG</c>
          <c>[[this memo]]</c>

          <c>0x434e4f48</c>
          <c>NONC</c>
          <c>[[this memo]]</c>

          <c>0x454c4544</c>
          <c>DELE</c>
          <c>[[this memo]]</c>

          <c>0x48544150</c>
          <c>PATH</c>
          <c>[[this memo]]</c>

          <c>0x49444152</c>
          <c>RADI</c>
          <c>[[this memo]]</c>

          <c>0x4b425550</c>
          <c>PUBK</c>
          <c>[[this memo]]</c>

          <c>0x5044494d</c>
          <c>MIDP</c>
          <c>[[this memo]]</c>

          <c>0x50455253</c>
          <c>SREP</c>
          <c>[[this memo]]</c>

          <c>0x544e494d</c>
          <c>MINT</c>
          <c>[[this memo]]</c>

          <c>0x544f4f52</c>
          <c>ROOT</c>
          <c>[[this memo]]</c>

          <c>0x54524543</c>
          <c>CERT</c>
          <c>[[this memo]]</c>

          <c>0x5458414d</c>
          <c>MAXT</c>
          <c>[[this memo]]</c>

          <c>0x58444e49</c>
          <c>INDX</c>
          <c>[[this memo]]</c>

        </texttable>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="Security Considerations">
      <t>
        Since the only supported signature scheme, Ed25519, is not quantum
        resistant, this protocol will not survive the advent of quantum
        computers.
      </t>
      <t>
        Maintaining a list of trusted servers and adjudicating violations of the
        rules by servers is not discussed in this document and is essential for
        security. Roughtime clients MUST update their view of which servers are
        trustworthy in order to benefit from the detection of misbehavior.
      </t>
      <t>
        Validating timestamps made on different dates requires knowledge of leap
        seconds in order to calculate time intervals correctly.
      </t>
      <t>
        Servers carry out a significant amount of computation in response to
        clients, and thus may experience vulnerability to denial of service
        attacks.
      </t>
      <t>
        This protocol does not provide any confidentiality, and given the nature
        of timestamps such impact is minor.
      </t>
      <t>
        The compromise of a PUBK's private
        key, even past MAXT, is a problem as the private key can be used to sign
        invalid times that are in the range MINT to MAXT, and thus violate the
        good behavior guarantee of the server.
      </t>
      <t>
        Servers MUST NOT send response packets larger than the request packets
        sent by clients, in order to prevent amplification attacks.
      </t>
    </section>

    <section title="Privacy Considerations">
      <t>
        This protocol is designed to obscure all client identifiers. Servers
        necessarily have persistent long-term identities essential to enforcing
        correct behavior. Generating nonces from previous responses without
        using a blind can enable tracking of clients as they move between
        networks.
      </t>
    </section>
  </middle>

  <back>
    <references title="Normative References">
      <reference anchor="ITU-R_TF.457-2">
        <front>
          <title>
            Use of the Modified Julian Date by the Standard-Frequency
            and Time-Signal Services
          </title>
          <author>
            <organization>
              ITU-R
            </organization>
          </author>
          <date year="1997" month="October"/>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="ITU-R Recommendation" value="TF.457-2"/>
      </reference>

      <reference anchor="ITU-R_TF.460-6">
        <front>
          <title>
            Standard-Frequency and Time-Signal Emissions
          </title>
          <author>
            <organization>
              ITU-R
            </organization>
          </author>
          <date year="2002" month="February"/>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="ITU-R Recommendation" value="TF.460-6"/>
      </reference>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.0020.xml"?>
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.4648.xml"?>
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.6234.xml"?>
      <?rfc include='reference.RFC.6335.xml'?>
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8032.xml"?>
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8259.xml"?>
    </references>
    <references title="Informative References">
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.0768.xml"?>
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119.xml"?>
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.5905.xml"?>
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.7384.xml"?>
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8174.xml"?>
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8573.xml"?>
      <?rfc include="reference.I-D.ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp.xml"?>

      <reference anchor="Autokey"
          target="https://zero-entropy.de/autokey_analysis.pdf">
        <front>
          <title>Analysis of the NTP Autokey Procedures</title>
          <author initials="S." surname="Rottger">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2012"/>
        </front>
      </reference>

      <reference anchor="DelayAttacks"
          target="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6336612">
        <front>
          <title>
            A Game Theoretic Analysis of Delay Attacks Against Time
            Synchronization Protocols
          </title>
          <author initials="T." surname="Mizrahi" fullname="Tal Mizrahi">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2012"/>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.1109/ISPCS.2012.6336612"/>
      </reference>

      <reference anchor="MCBG" target="https://eprint.iacr.org/2015/1020">
        <front>
          <title>Attacking the Network Time Protocol</title>
          <author initials="A." surname="Malhotra" fullname="A. Malhotra">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="I." surname="Cohen" fullname="I. Cohen">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="E." surname="Brakke" fullname="E. Brakke">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author initials="S." surname="Goldberg" fullname="S. Goldberg">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date year="2015"/>
        </front>
      </reference>
    </references>

    <section title="Terms and Abbreviations">
      <t>
        <list style="hanging">
          <t hangText="ASCII ">American Standard Code for Information
              Interchange</t>
          <t hangText="IANA  ">Internet Assigned Numbers Authority</t>
          <t hangText="JSON  "><xref target="RFC8259">JavaScript Object
              Notation</xref></t>
          <t hangText="MJD   ">Modified Julian Date</t>
          <t hangText="NTP   "><xref target="RFC5905">Network Time Protocol
              </xref></t>
          <t hangText="NTS   "><xref target="I-D.ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp">
              Network Time Security</xref></t>
          <t hangText="UDP   "><xref target="RFC0768">User Datagram Protocol
              </xref></t>
          <t hangText="UTC   "><xref target="ITU-R_TF.460-6">Coordinated
              Universal Time</xref></t>
        </list>
      </t>
    </section>
  </back>
</rfc>
