idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-pim-registry-04.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 -- The document date (January 31, 2011) is 4834 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 informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 4601 (Obsoleted by RFC 7761) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 5226 (Obsoleted by RFC 8126) Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group S. Venaas 3 Internet-Draft cisco Systems 4 Intended status: Standards Track January 31, 2011 5 Expires: August 4, 2011 7 A Registry for PIM Message Types 8 draft-ietf-pim-registry-04.txt 10 Abstract 12 This document provides instructions to IANA for the creation of a 13 registry for PIM message types. It specifies initial content of the 14 registry based on existing RFCs specifying PIM message types. It 15 also specifies a procedure for registering new types. 17 In addition to this, one message type is reserved, and may be used 18 for a future extension of the message type space. 20 Status of this Memo 22 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 23 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 25 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 26 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 27 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 28 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 30 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 31 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 32 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 33 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 35 This Internet-Draft will expire on August 4, 2011. 37 Copyright Notice 39 Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 40 document authors. All rights reserved. 42 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 43 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 44 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 45 publication of this document. Please review these documents 46 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 47 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 48 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 49 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 50 described in the Simplified BSD License. 52 Table of Contents 54 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 55 2. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 56 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 57 3.1. Initial registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 58 3.2. Assignment of new message types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 59 4. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 60 5. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 61 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 63 1. Introduction 65 Apart from this document, there is no existing document specifying a 66 registry for PIM message types. PIM version 1 made use of IGMP 67 [RFC1112] and there is an IGMP registry [IGMPREG] listing the message 68 types used by PIM version 1. PIM version 2 however is not based on 69 IGMP, and a separate PIM message type registry is needed. There are 70 currently several RFCs specifying new PIM version 2 message types 71 that should be in this new registry. They are the RFCs for PIM Dense 72 Mode [RFC3973], PIM Sparse Mode [RFC4601] and Bidirectional PIM 73 [RFC5015]. 75 This document specifies the initial content of the new PIM message 76 type registry based on those existing RFCs. This document also 77 specifies a procedure for registering new PIM message types. 79 In addition to this, this document reserves one message type. This 80 type may be used for a future extension of the message type space. 81 The current message type space is only 4 bits, so it is not unlikely 82 that this will be needed. How exactly the extension should be done 83 is left to a future document. 85 2. Security Considerations 87 This document only creates an IANA registry. There may be a security 88 benefit in a well-known place for finding information on which PIM 89 message types are valid and how they are used. Apart from that there 90 are no security considerations. 92 3. IANA Considerations 94 This document requests IANA to create a PIM message type registry. 95 This should be placed in the "Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM)" 96 branch of the tree. Each entry in the registry consists of message 97 type, message name and references to the documents defining the type. 98 The message type is a 4-bit integer with possible values from 0 to 99 15. 101 3.1. Initial registry 103 The initial content of the registry should be as follows. 105 Type Name Reference 106 ------ ---------------------------------------- --------------------- 107 0 Hello [RFC3973] [RFC4601] 108 1 Register [RFC4601] 109 2 Register Stop [RFC4601] 110 3 Join/Prune [RFC3973] [RFC4601] 111 4 Bootstrap [RFC4601] 112 5 Assert [RFC3973] [RFC4601] 113 6 Graft [RFC3973] 114 7 Graft-Ack [RFC3973] 115 8 Candidate RP Advertisement [RFC4601] 116 9 State Refresh [RFC3973] 117 10 DF Election [RFC5015] 118 11-14 Unassigned this document 119 15 Reserved (for extension of type space) this document 121 3.2. Assignment of new message types 123 Assignment of new message types is done according to the "IETF 124 Review" model, see [RFC5226]. 126 4. Acknowledgements 128 Thanks to Toerless Eckert for his suggestion to reserve a type for 129 future message type space extension. Also thanks to Mykyta 130 Yevstifeyev for reviewing the document and proposing improvements to 131 the text. 133 5. Informative References 135 [IGMPREG] IANA, "IGMP Type Numbers", IGMP TYPE NUMBERS - per 136 RFC3228, 137 BCP57 http://www.iana.org/assignments/igmp-type-numbers, 138 June 2005. 140 [RFC1112] Deering, S., "Host extensions for IP multicasting", STD 5, 141 RFC 1112, August 1989. 143 [RFC3973] Adams, A., Nicholas, J., and W. Siadak, "Protocol 144 Independent Multicast - Dense Mode (PIM-DM): Protocol 145 Specification (Revised)", RFC 3973, January 2005. 147 [RFC4601] Fenner, B., Handley, M., Holbrook, H., and I. Kouvelas, 148 "Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): 149 Protocol Specification (Revised)", RFC 4601, August 2006. 151 [RFC5015] Handley, M., Kouvelas, I., Speakman, T., and L. Vicisano, 152 "Bidirectional Protocol Independent Multicast (BIDIR- 153 PIM)", RFC 5015, October 2007. 155 [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an 156 IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, 157 May 2008. 159 Author's Address 161 Stig Venaas 162 cisco Systems 163 Tasman Drive 164 San Jose, CA 95134 165 USA 167 Email: stig@cisco.com