Network Working Group A. Newton Internet-Draft VeriSign, Inc. Expires: August 15, 2004 February 15, 2004 IRIS - An Address Registry (areg) Type for the Internet Registry Information Service draft-ietf-crisp-iris-areg-05 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 August 15, 2004. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. Abstract This document describes an IRIS registry schema for IP address information. The schema extends the necessary query and result operations of IRIS to provide the functional information service needs for syntaxes and results used by Internet Protocol address registries. Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 1] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Document Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Schema Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1 Query Derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1.1 Query . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1.2 , , and . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.2 Result Derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2.1 and Results . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2.2 Result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2.3 Result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2.4 Result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.2.5 Contact References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.2.6 Common Result Child Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.3 Support for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4. Terminology for Nesting of Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5. Formal XML Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6. BEEP Transport Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 6.1 Message Pattern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 6.2 Server Authentication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 7. URI Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 7.1 Application Service Label . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 7.2 Bottom-Up Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 7.3 Top-Down Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 8. Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 A. Example Requests and Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 A.1 Example 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 A.2 Example 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 B. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . 39 Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 2] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 1. Introduction This document describes an IRIS namespace for Internet address registries using an XML Schema [5] derived from and using the IRIS [9] schema. This schema and registry type are provided to demonstrate the extensibility of the IRIS framework beyond the use of domains, a criteria defined in CRISP [11]. The schema given is this document is specified using the Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 as described in XML [2], XML Schema notation as described in XML_SD [4] and XML_SS [5], and XML Namespaces as described in XML_NS [3]. Examples of client/server XML exchanges with this registry type are available in Appendix A. Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 3] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 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 [8]. Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 4] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 3. Schema Description IRIS requires the derivation of both query and result elements by a registry schema. These descriptions follow. The descriptions contained within this section refer to XML elements and attributes and their relation to the exchange of data within the protocol. These descriptions also contain specifications outside the scope of the formal XML syntax. Therefore, this section will use terms defined by RFC 2119 [8] to describe the specification outside the scope of the formal XML syntax. While reading this section, please reference Section 5 for needed details on the formal XML syntax. 3.1 Query Derivatives 3.1.1 Query searches for contacts given search constraints. The child element allows the search to be constrained against the name of the contact. This element may either have as children the element or the and elements. constrains the query based on the e-mail address of the contact. This may be done by an exact e-mail address using the element or by any e-mail address in a domain using the element. The element MUST only contain a valid domain according to RFC 1035 [1] (i.e. no '@' symbol). 3.1.2 , , and The , , and elements allow searches by name of organizations, autonomous systems, and networks, respectively. All three have the same format. The child element may either have as children the element or the and elements. 3.1.3 The element is a query for a network given a related IP address, IP address range, or network handle. It has the following child elements: o - contains the handle of a network. Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 5] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 o - has a child element containing the starting IPv4 address of the network and an optional child of containing the ending IPv4 address of the network. o - same as but the child addresses contain IPv6 addresses. Clients MUST convert any short-form notation to the fully-qualified notation. o - contains an IPv4 CIDR block address. o - contains an IPv6 CIDR block address. Clients MUST convert any short-form notation to the fully-qualified notation. o - determines the network specificity for the search (see Section 4). Valid values are "less", "least", "more", and "most". This element may have the optional attribute 'allowEquivalences'. When set to "true", the result set should include networks with equivalent starting and ending addresses. The results from this query MUST be either the result or the result. More than one network result MAY be returned. 3.2 Result Derivatives 3.2.1 and Results The and share a common defintion of 'ipNetworkType'. It has the following child elements: o contains the registry-unique assigned handle for this network. o contains a human friendly name for the network. o contains the network address of the network in CIDR notation form. o contains the first IP address of the network. o contains the last IP address of the network. o contains a string denoting the type of network. o One or more elements, each containing a name, either IP address or domain name, of a nameserver responsible for reverse-DNS mapping for this network. Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 6] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 o contains an entity reference to the organization assigned this network. The referent MUST be an (Section 3.2.4) result. o One of: * contains an entity reference to the parent network of this network. The referent MUST be an (Section 3.2.1) result if this reference is a child of . The referent MUST be an (Section 3.2.1) result if this reference is a child of . * contains no children and simply signifies that the network does not have a parent. o Contact references (see Section 3.2.5). o Common child elements (see Section 3.2.6). 3.2.2 Result The element represents an assigned autonomous system. It has the following children: o contains a registry-unique assigned handle for this autonomous system. o contains an integer indicating the starting number for the autonomous system. o contains an integer indicating the ending number for the autonomous system. o contains a human friendly name of this autonomous system. o contains an entity reference to the organization assigned this autonomous system. The referent MUST be an (Section 3.2.4) result. o Contact references (see Section 3.2.5). o Common child elements (see Section 3.2.6). 3.2.3 Result The element represents the registration of a point of Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 7] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 contact. It has the following child elements: o contains the registry-unique assigned handle for this contact. o Either , , and or . The first three elements specify the name of the contact broken down into the common components of a persons name. The latter element, , specifies that the contact is a group of people given the responsibility described by this element. o contains the email address for this contact. o contains the sip address for this contact. o contains an entity reference to the organization associated with this contact. The referent MUST be an (Section 3.2.4) result. o contains child elements describing the phone number of the contact. The child elements are , , and . o Common child elements (see Section 3.2.6). 3.2.4 Result The element represents an organization responsible for network resources. It has the following child elements: o contains the name of the organization. o contains a registry-unique identifier for this organization. o
contains the street address for this organization. o contains the city where this organization is located. o contains the national region where this organization is located. o contains the postal code where this organization is located. o contains the country code where this organization is located. This MUST be compliant with ISO 3166 [12]. Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 8] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 o Contact references (see Section 3.2.5). o Common child elements (see Section 3.2.6). 3.2.5 Contact References The registry schema defined in Section 5 normalizes out a group of elements used to reference contacts. This group is used by many of the result types for this registry. The group has the following elements, each of which may appear as many times as needed. The referent of each MUST be (Section 3.2.3) results. o o o o o 3.2.6 Common Result Child Elements The registry schema defined in Section 5 normalizes out a group of common elements used most of the reult types. The group has the following elements: o contains an entity reference to the number resource registry of record. The referent MUST be an (Section 3.2.4) result. o contains the date of first registration. o contains the date when the registration was last updated. o The element contains an entity reference specifying an entity that is indirectly associated with this result object. 3.3 Support for The following types of entity classes are recognized by the query of IRIS for this registry: Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 9] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 o ipv4-handle - a registry unique identifier specifying an IPv4 network. Queries with these names will yield a result. o ipv6-handle - a registry unique identifier specifying an IPv6 network. Queries with these names will yield a result. o autonomous-system - the positive integer (ASN) specifying an autonomous system. It yields a result of . o as-handle - a registry unique identifier specifying an autonomous system. It yields a result of . o contact-handle - a registry unique identifier of a contact. Yields a result of . o organization-id - a registry unique identifier of an organization. Yields a result of . o The entity names of these entity classes are case insensitive. Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 10] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 4. Terminology for Nesting of Networks The following terms are defined for describing the nesting of IP networks. o More specific: Given two networks, A and B, A is more specific than B if network B includes all space of network A, and if network B is larger than network A. o Less specific: Opposite of more specific. The network B is less specific than network A if network A's all space is included in network B and if network A is smaller than network B. o Most specific: Given a set of networks, the network or networks that are more specific than zero or more of other networks in the set, and that are not a less specific of any of the networks in the set. o Least specific: Given a set of networks, the network or networks that are not more specific to any of the other networks in the set. Examples: +-------------------------------------------------------+ | | | Given the networks A, B, C and D as follows: | | | | A |---------------------------------| | | B |-----------------| | | C |---------| | | D |-------| | | | | | | The network A is less specific than B, C and D. | | The network B is more specific than A. | | Among these four networks, A is the least specific, | | and C and D are the most specific networks. | | | +-------------------------------------------------------+ Figure 1: Nesting Example 1 Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 11] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 +-------------------------------------------------------+ | | | Given the networks E, F and G: | | | | E |----------| | | F |--------------| | | G |---| | | | | The networks E and F are least specific networks. | | The networks F and G are most specific networks. | | | +-------------------------------------------------------+ Figure 2: Nesting Example 2 Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 12] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 5. Formal XML Syntax This IP address registry is specified in the XML Schema notation. The formal syntax presented here is a complete schema representation suitable for automated validation of an XML instance when combined with the formal schema syntax of IRIS. IP address registry schema derived from IRIS schema Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 13] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 17] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 21] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 23] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 Figure 3 Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 24] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 6. BEEP Transport Compliance IRIS allows several extensions of the core capabilities. This section outlines those extensions allowable by IRIS-BEEP [10]. 6.1 Message Pattern This registry type uses the default message pattern as described in IRIS-BEEP [10]. 6.2 Server Authentication This registry type uses the default server authentication method as described in IRIS-BEEP [10]. Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 25] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 7. URI Resolution 7.1 Application Service Label The application service label associated with this registry type MUST be "AREG1". This is the abbreviated form the URN for this registry type, urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:areg1. 7.2 Bottom-Up Resolution The bottom-up alternative resolution method MUST be identified as 'bottom' in IRIS URI's. The process for this resolution method differs from the direct-resolution method if the authority is only an IP address (i.e. without the port number). The process for this condition is as follows: 1. The IP address is converted into a domain name appropriate for the reverse DNS tree mapping. For instance, 64.83.37.226 is 226.37.83.64.in-addr.arpa. 2. The IRIS [9] direct resolution process is tried on this reverse-map domain name. 3. If no records are found, then the left-most component of the reverse-map domain name is removed, and the second step is repeated again (e.g. "37.83.64.in-addr.arpa" ) 4. If all the components of the reverse-map domain name from step one are removed and no records are found, then the original IP address is used and the port number used is the well-known port for the default protocol of IRIS. 7.3 Top-Down Resolution The top-down alternative resolution method MUST be identified as 'top' in IRIS URI's. The process for this resolution method differs from the direct-resolution method if the authority is only an IP address (i.e. without the port number). The process for this condition is as follows: 1. The IP address is converted into a domain name appropriate for the reverse DNS tree mapping. For instance, 64.83.37.226 is 226.37.83.64.in-addr.arpa. Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 26] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 2. The reverse-map domain name is reduced to the appropriate least two components (e.g. "in-addr.arpa"). 3. The IRIS [9] direct resolution method is tried on this reverse-map domain name. 4. If no records are found, then the component in the original reverse-map domain name to the right of the left-most component of this reverse-map domain name is prepended, and the third step is repeated (e.g. if "in-addr.arpa" then "64.in-addr.arpa", if "64.in-addr.arpa" then "83.64.in-addr.arpa"). 5. If all the components of the original reverse-map domain name from step one are present and no records are found, then the original IP address is used and the port number used is the well-known port for the default protocol of IRIS. Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 27] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 8. Internationalization Considerations This document lays out no new considerations for internationalization beyond that specified in IRIS [9]. Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 28] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 9. IANA Considerations The following URN will need to be registered with IANA according to the IANA considerations defined in IRIS [9]: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:areg1 The following NAPSTR application service label will need to be registered with IANA according to the IANA considerations defined in IRIS [9]: AREG1 Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 29] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 10. Security Considerations This document lays out no new considerations for security precautions beyond that specified in IRIS [9]. Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 30] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 References [1] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. [2] World Wide Web Consortium, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0", W3C XML, February 1998, . [3] World Wide Web Consortium, "Namespaces in XML", W3C XML Namespaces, January 1999, . [4] World Wide Web Consortium, "XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes", W3C XML Schema, October 2000, . [5] World Wide Web Consortium, "XML Schema Part 1: Structures", W3C XML Schema, October 2000, . [6] Reynolds, J. and J. Postel, "ASSIGNED NUMBERS", RFC 1700, STD 2, October 1994. [7] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 2434, BCP 26, October 1998. [8] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, BCP 14, March 1997. [9] Newton, A., "Internet Registry Information Service", draft-ietf-crisp-iris-core-01 (work in progress), November 2002. [10] Newton, A., "Internet Registry Information Service (IRIS) over the Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol (BEEP)", draft-ietf-crisp-iris-beep-01 (work in progress), November 2002. [11] Newton, A., "Cross Registry Internet Service Protocol (CRISP) Requirements", draft-ietf-crisp-requirements-01 (work in progress), October 2002. [12] International Organization for Standardization, "Codes for the representation of names of countries, 3rd edition", ISO Standard 3166, August 1988. Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 31] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 Author's Address Andrew L. Newton VeriSign, Inc. 21345 Ridgetop Circle Sterling, VA 20166 USA Phone: +1 703 948 3382 EMail: andy@hxr.us; anewton@verisignlabs.com Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 32] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 Appendix A. Example Requests and Responses The examples in this section use the string "C:" to denote data sent by a client to a server and the string "S:" to denote data sent by a server to a client. A.1 Example 1 The following is an example of entity lookup for the contact-handle of 'JN560-ARIN'. C: C: C: C: C: C: C: C: C: C: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: JN560-ARIN S: S: John S: Niland S: S: S: S: VeriSign, Inc. S: S: S: S: S: +1-703-948-4300 S: office S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: Figure 4: Example 1 A.2 Example 2 The following example shows a query to find the IP networks containing a given address. C: C: C: C: C: C: C: C: 65.201.175.9 C: C: C: most C: C: C: C: Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 34] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 C: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: NET-65-201-175-0-1 S: S: S: UU-65-201-175-D6 S: S: S: 65.201.175.0/24 S: S: S: 65.201.175.0 S: S: S: 65.201.175.255 S: S: reassigned S: auth03.ns.uu.net S: auth00.ns.uu.net S: S: S: VeriSign, Inc. S: S: S: S: Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 35] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 S: S: Niland, John S: S: S: S: 2002-11-18T00:00:00-00:00 S: S: S: 2002-11-18T00:00:00-00:00 S: S: S: S: S: S: NET-65-192-0-0-1 S: S: S: UUNET65 S: S: S: 65.192.0.0/11 S: S: S: 65.192.0.0 S: S: S: 65.223.255.255 S: S: direct allocation S: auth03.ns.uu.net S: auth00.ns.uu.net S: S: S: UUNET Technologies, Inc. S: S: S: S: S: S: 2000-10-27T00:00:00-00:00 S: S: S: 2002-02-13T00:00:00-00:00 S: S: S: S: S: S: S: S: Addresses within this block are non-portable. S: S: S: S: S: S: Figure 5: Example 2 Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 37] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 Appendix B. Acknowledgements Many of the concepts concerning the use of SRV records for step-wise refinement towards finding authoritative servers and many of the details of result objects in this draft were originally created by Eric A. Hall in his memos regarding the use of LDAP to satisfy the CRISP requirements. These concepts have contributed significantly to the development of this protocol. Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 38] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 Intellectual Property Statement The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property 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; neither does it represent that it has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of claims of rights made available for publication 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 implementors or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive Director. Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). 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 assignees. 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 Newton Expires August 15, 2004 [Page 39] Internet-Draft iris-areg February 2004 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 August 15, 2004 [Page 40]