idnits 2.17.1 draft-bjh21-ssh-transport-extension-02.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** It looks like you're using RFC 3978 boilerplate. You should update this to the boilerplate described in the IETF Trust License Policy document (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info), which is required now. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.1 on line 16. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.5, updated by RFC 4748 on line 163. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 1 on line 174. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 2 on line 181. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 3 on line 187. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust Copyright Line does not match the current year == Line 90 has weird spacing: '... string ext...' == The document seems to lack the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119 keywords. (The document does seem to have the reference to RFC 2119 which the ID-Checklist requires). -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (February 2007) is 6279 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) No issues found here. Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 7 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group B. Harris 3 Internet-Draft February 2007 4 Intended status: Standards Track 5 Expires: August 5, 2007 7 Extended packet types for the Secure Shell (SSH) Transport Layer 8 Protocol 9 draft-bjh21-ssh-transport-extension-02 11 Status of this Memo 13 By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any 14 applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware 15 have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes 16 aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. 18 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 19 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 20 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 21 Drafts. 23 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 24 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 25 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 26 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 28 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 29 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 31 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 32 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 34 This Internet-Draft will expire on August 5, 2007. 36 Copyright Notice 38 Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). 40 Abstract 42 This memo introduces a new message type into the Secure Shell (SSH) 43 Transport Layer Protocol whose meaning and contents are defined by a 44 name at the start of the message, thus allowing for further 45 extensions to the protocol to be implemented without using further 46 message numbers. 48 Comments are solicited and should be addressed to the mailing list at 49 or to the author. 51 1. Introduction 53 Secure Shell (SSH) [RFC4251] is a secure remote-login protocol. Its 54 transport layer is designed to be extensible, and in particular the 55 various cryptographic algorithms that it uses are identified by 56 names, which are strings of up to 64 ASCII characters. 57 Significantly, names ending with '@' followed by a domain name are 58 reserved for allocation by the owner of the corresponding domain. 60 Individual messages in SSH, though, have their meaning specified by a 61 single byte at the start. Only 19 of these message numbers are 62 available for generic transport-layer purposes, and at the time of 63 writing six have already been allocated. This shortage of message 64 numbers, and the requirement that they be allocated by Standards 65 Action, increases the difficulty of developing extensions to the SSH 66 Transport Layer Protocol that require new messages. 68 This document aims to alleviate this problem by allocating one 69 message number for extensions to the transport layer protocol, with 70 the type of the packet being identified by name. This is not 71 intended to preclude the allocation of new message numbers for 72 extensions for which named messages would have an excessive 73 performance impact. 75 2. Conventions Used in this Document 77 The key word "MUST" in this document is to be interpreted as 78 described in [RFC2119]. 80 The data types "byte" and "string" are defined in section 5 of 81 [RFC4251]. 83 Other terminology and symbols have the same meaning as in [RFC4253]. 85 3. Extension Message Format 87 The format of the message is: 89 byte SSH_MSG_TRANSPORT_EXTENSION 90 string extension name 91 ... extension-specific fields 93 The meaning of the message and the contents of 'extension-specific 94 fields' are determined by 'extension name', which follows the 95 conventions described in section 4.6.1 of [RFC4250]. 97 If an implementation receives an SSH_MSG_TRANSPORT_EXTENSION whose 98 'extension name' it does not recognise, it MUST treat it as if the 99 message number were unrecognised and return SSH_MSG_UNIMPLEMENTED as 100 specified in section 11.4 of [RFC4253]. 102 4. Message Number 104 The following message number is defined: 106 SSH_MSG_TRANSPORT_EXTENSION XXX 108 5. Security Considerations 110 The security considerations in [RFC4251] apply. 112 6. IANA Considerations 114 IANA should assign a Message Number in the range 1 to 19 for 115 SSH_MSG_TRANSPORT_EXTENSION in accordance with section 4.1 of 116 [RFC4250]. 118 IANA should maintain a register of Transport Layer Extension Packet 119 Names following the conventions and instructions in section 4.6 of 120 [RFC4250]. 122 7. Normative References 124 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 125 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 127 [RFC4250] Lehtinen, S. and C. Lonvick, "The Secure Shell (SSH) 128 Protocol Assigned Numbers", RFC 4250, January 2006. 130 [RFC4251] Ylonen, T. and C. Lonvick, "The Secure Shell (SSH) 131 Protocol Architecture", RFC 4251, January 2006. 133 [RFC4253] Ylonen, T. and C. Lonvick, "The Secure Shell (SSH) 134 Transport Layer Protocol", RFC 4253, January 2006. 136 Trademark Notice 138 "SSH" is a registered trademark in the United States. 140 Author's Address 142 Ben Harris 143 2a Eachard Road 144 CAMBRIDGE CB3 0HY 145 GB 147 Email: bjh21@bjh21.me.uk 149 Full Copyright Statement 151 Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). 153 This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions 154 contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors 155 retain all their rights. 157 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an 158 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS 159 OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND 160 THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS 161 OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF 162 THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED 163 WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 165 Intellectual Property 167 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 168 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to 169 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 170 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 171 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has 172 made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information 173 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be 174 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. 176 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any 177 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an 178 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of 179 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this 180 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at 181 http://www.ietf.org/ipr. 183 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 184 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 185 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement 186 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at 187 ietf-ipr@ietf.org. 189 Acknowledgment 191 Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF 192 Administrative Support Activity (IASA).