idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-ippm-owamp-registry-02.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. 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 and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year == Line 208 has weird spacing: '... Shared thi...' (Using the creation date from RFC4656, updated by this document, for RFC5378 checks: 2000-11-22) -- 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 (August 27, 2015) is 3164 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) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 5226 (Obsoleted by RFC 8126) Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group A. Morton 3 Internet-Draft AT&T Labs 4 Updates: 4656 (if approved) August 27, 2015 5 Intended status: Standards Track 6 Expires: February 28, 2016 8 Registries for the One-Way Active Measurement Protocol - OWAMP 9 draft-ietf-ippm-owamp-registry-02 11 Abstract 13 This memo describes the registries for OWAMP - the One-Way Active 14 Measurement Protocol. The registries allow assignment of MODE bit 15 positions and OWAMP Command numbers. The memo also requests that 16 IANA establish the registries for new features, called the OWAMP- 17 Modes registry and the OWAMP Control Command Number registry. This 18 memo updates RFC 4656. 20 Requirements Language 22 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 23 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 24 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 26 Status of This Memo 28 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 29 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 31 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 32 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 33 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 34 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 36 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 37 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 38 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 39 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 41 This Internet-Draft will expire on February 28, 2016. 43 Copyright Notice 45 Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 46 document authors. All rights reserved. 48 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 49 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 50 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 51 publication of this document. Please review these documents 52 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 53 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 54 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 55 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 56 described in the Simplified BSD License. 58 Table of Contents 60 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 61 2. Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 62 3. IANA Considerations for OWAMP Control Registries . . . . . . 3 63 3.1. Control Command Number Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 64 3.1.1. Registry Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 65 3.1.2. Registry Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 66 3.1.3. Experimental Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 67 3.1.4. OWAMP-Control Command Numbers Initial Contents . . . 3 68 3.2. OWAMP-Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 69 3.2.1. Registry Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 70 3.2.2. Registry Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 71 3.2.3. Experimental Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 72 3.2.4. OWAMP-Modes Initial Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 73 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 74 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 75 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 76 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 77 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 78 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 80 1. Introduction 82 The One-way Active Measurement Protocol, OWAMP [RFC4656] was prepared 83 to support measurements of metrics specified by the IP Performance 84 Metrics (IPPM) working group in the IETF. The Two-Way Active 85 Measurement Protocol, TWAMP [RFC5357] is an extension of OWAMP. The 86 TWAMP specification gathered wide review as it approached completion, 87 and the by-products were several recommendations for new features in 88 TWAMP. As a result, a registry of new features was established for 89 TWAMP. However, there were no new features proposed for OWAMP until 90 recently [I-D.ietf-ippm-ipsec]. 92 This memo establishes the needed registries for OWAMP, and updates 93 [RFC4656]. 95 2. Purpose and Scope 97 The purpose and scope of this memo is to describe and request the 98 establishment of registries for future OWAMP [RFC4656] extensions. 99 IANA already administrates the "Two-way Active Measurement Protocol 100 (TWAMP) Parameters", and this request follows a similar form (with 101 one exception identified below). 103 This memo also provides the initial contents for the OWAMP 104 registries. 106 3. IANA Considerations for OWAMP Control Registries 108 OWAMP-Control protocol coordinates the measurement capability. All 109 OWAMP-Control messages follow specifications defined in section 3 of 110 [RFC4656]. 112 3.1. Control Command Number Registry 114 IANA is requested to create a OWAMP-Control Command Number registry. 116 OWAMP-Control Commands follow specifications defined in section 3.4 117 of [RFC4656]. 119 3.1.1. Registry Specification 121 OWAMP-Control Commands Numbers are specified in the first octet of 122 OWAMP-Control-Client command messages consistent with section 3 of 123 [RFC4656]. There are a maximum of 256 command numbers. 125 3.1.2. Registry Management 127 Because the "OWAMP-Control Command Numbers" registry can contain only 128 256 values, and because OWAMP is an IETF protocol, these registries 129 MUST be updated only by "IETF Consensus" as specified in [RFC5226] 130 (an RFC that documents registry use and is approved by the IESG). 132 3.1.3. Experimental Numbers 134 One experimental value is currently assigned in the Command Numbers 135 Registry, as indicated in the initial contents below. 137 3.1.4. OWAMP-Control Command Numbers Initial Contents 139 OWAMP-Control Commands follows the procedure defined in section 3.5 140 of [RFC4656] (and in the remainder of section 3). 142 The complete set of OWAMP-Control Command Numbers are as follows 143 (including two reserved values): 145 OWAMP-Control Command Numbers Registry 147 Value Description Semantics Reference 148 Definition 149 ========================================================== 150 0 Reserved 151 1 Request-Session Section 3.5 RFC 4656 152 2 Start-Sessions Section 3.7 RFC 4656 153 3 Stop-Sessions Section 3.8 RFC 4656 154 4 Fetch-Sessions Section 3.9 RFC 4656 155 5-253 Unassigned 156 254 Experimentation This Memo 157 255 Reserved 159 3.2. OWAMP-Modes 161 IANA is requested to create an OWAMP-Modes registry. 163 3.2.1. Registry Specification 165 OWAMP-Modes are specified in OWAMP Server Greeting messages and Set- 166 up Response messages consistent with section 3.1 of [RFC4656]. Modes 167 are currently indicated by setting single bits in the 32-bit Modes 168 Field. However, more complex encoding may be used in the future. 170 3.2.2. Registry Management 172 Because the "OWAMP-Modes" are based on only 32 bit positions with 173 each position conveying a unique feature, and because OWAMP is an 174 IETF protocol, these registries MUST be updated only by "IETF 175 Consensus" as specified in [RFC5226] (an RFC that documents registry 176 use and is approved by the IESG). IANA SHOULD allocate monotonically 177 increasing bit positions when requested. 179 3.2.3. Experimental Numbers 181 No experimental bit positions are currently assigned in the Modes 182 Registry, as indicated in the initial contents below. 184 3.2.4. OWAMP-Modes Initial Contents 186 OWAMP-Control connection establishment follows the procedure defined 187 in section 3.1 of [RFC4656]. 189 In the OWAMP-Modes registry, assignments are straightforward on the 190 basis of bit positions, and there are no references to values - this 191 is a difference from the comparable TWAMP registry (and a topic for 192 improvement in the TWAMP-Modes registry which is reconciled in 193 [I-D.ietf-ippm-ipsec]). 195 An Extension of the OWAMP-Modes is proposed in [I-D.ietf-ippm-ipsec]. 196 With this extension, the complete set of OWAMP Mode bit positions are 197 as follows (including one reserved bit position): 199 OWAMP-Modes Registry 201 Bit Semantics 202 Pos. Description Definition Reference 203 ===================================================== 204 0 Unauthenticated Section 3.1 RFC4656 205 1 Authenticated Section 3.1 RFC4656 206 2 Encrypted Section 3.1 RFC4656 207 3 Reserved this memo 208 4 IKEv2-derived Shared this memo and 209 Secret Key Section 5 RFC_TBD 210 5-31 Unassigned 212 (where RFC_TBD the published version of draft-ietf-ippm-ipsec) 214 In the original OWAMP Modes field, setting bit position 0, 1 or 2 215 indicated the security mode of the Control protocol, and the Test 216 protocol inherited the same mode (see section 4 of [RFC4656]). 218 The value of the Modes Field sent by the Server in the Server- 219 Greeting message is the bit-wise OR of the modes (bit positions) that 220 it is willing to support during this session. Thus, the five least 221 significant bits of the Modes 32-bit Field are used. When no other 222 features are activated, the 27 most significant bits MUST be zero. A 223 Control-Client conforming to [RFC4656] MAY ignore the values in the 224 29 most significant bits of the Modes Field, or it MAY support 225 features that are communicated in other bit positions, such as the 226 IKEv2-derived Shared Secret Key extension [I-D.ietf-ippm-ipsec]. 228 OWAMP and TWAMP registries for Modes may grow to contain different 229 features and functions due to the inherent differences in one-way and 230 two-way measurement configurations and the metrics they measure. No 231 attempt will be made to coordinate them unnecessarily, except the 232 Reserved bit position 3 above. This is available for assignment if a 233 mixed security mode similar to[RFC5618] is defined for OWAMP, and 234 would allow alignment with the comparable TWAMP feature. 236 4. Security Considerations 238 As this memo simply requests the creation of OWAMP registries, it 239 presents no new security or privacy issues for the Internet. 241 The security considerations that apply to any active measurement of 242 live networks are relevant here as well. See [RFC4656] and 243 [RFC5357]. 245 Privacy considerations for measurement systems, particularly when 246 Internet users participate in the tests in some way, are described in 247 [I-D.ietf-lmap-framework]. 249 5. Acknowledgements 251 The author would like to thank Kostas Pentikousis, Nalini Elkins, 252 Mike Ackermann, and Greg Mirsky for insightful reviews and comments. 253 Spencer Dawkins caught the last of the small errors (hopefully) in 254 his AD review. 256 6. References 258 6.1. Normative References 260 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 261 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 262 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 263 . 265 [RFC4656] Shalunov, S., Teitelbaum, B., Karp, A., Boote, J., and M. 266 Zekauskas, "A One-way Active Measurement Protocol 267 (OWAMP)", RFC 4656, DOI 10.17487/RFC4656, September 2006, 268 . 270 [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an 271 IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, 272 DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008, 273 . 275 [RFC5357] Hedayat, K., Krzanowski, R., Morton, A., Yum, K., and J. 276 Babiarz, "A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)", 277 RFC 5357, DOI 10.17487/RFC5357, October 2008, 278 . 280 6.2. Informative References 282 [I-D.ietf-ippm-ipsec] 283 Pentikousis, K., Zhang, E., and Y. Cui, "IKEv2-derived 284 Shared Secret Key for O/TWAMP", draft-ietf-ippm-ipsec-11 285 (work in progress), August 2015. 287 [I-D.ietf-lmap-framework] 288 Eardley, P., Morton, A., Bagnulo, M., Burbridge, T., 289 Aitken, P., and A. Akhter, "A framework for Large-Scale 290 Measurement of Broadband Performance (LMAP)", draft-ietf- 291 lmap-framework-14 (work in progress), April 2015. 293 [RFC5618] Morton, A. and K. Hedayat, "Mixed Security Mode for the 294 Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)", RFC 5618, 295 DOI 10.17487/RFC5618, August 2009, 296 . 298 Author's Address 300 Al Morton 301 AT&T Labs 302 200 Laurel Avenue South 303 Middletown,, NJ 07748 304 USA 306 Phone: +1 732 420 1571 307 Fax: +1 732 368 1192 308 Email: acmorton@att.com 309 URI: http://home.comcast.net/~acmacm/