idnits 2.17.1 draft-sipos-bpv7-admin-iana-00.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 (13 October 2021) is 919 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) -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IANA-BP' Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Delay-Tolerant Networking B. Sipos 3 Internet-Draft JHU APL 4 Updates: -ietf-dtn-bpbis (if approved) 13 October 2021 5 Intended status: Standards Track 6 Expires: 16 April 2022 8 Bundle Protocol Version 7 Administrative Record Types Registry 9 draft-sipos-bpv7-admin-iana-00 11 Abstract 13 This document clarifies that a Bundle Protocol Version 7 agent is 14 intended to use an IANA sub-registry for Administrative Record types. 15 It also makes a code point reservation for private or experimental 16 use. 18 Status of This Memo 20 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 21 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 23 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 24 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 25 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 26 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 28 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 29 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 30 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 31 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 33 This Internet-Draft will expire on 16 April 2022. 35 Copyright Notice 37 Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 38 document authors. All rights reserved. 40 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 41 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ 42 license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. 43 Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights 44 and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components 45 extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text 46 as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are 47 provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. 49 Table of Contents 51 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 52 1.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 53 1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 54 2. Administrative Record Types Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 55 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 56 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 57 4.1. Bundle Administrative Record Types . . . . . . . . . . . 3 58 5. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 59 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 60 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 61 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 62 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 64 1. Introduction 66 The earlier Bundle Protocol (BP) Version 6 (BPv6) defined an IANA 67 sub-registry for Administrative Record type code points under 68 [IANA-BP]. When Bundle Protocol Version 7 (BPv7) was published in 69 [I-D.ietf-dtn-bpbis] it included an explicit table of Administrative 70 Record types but made no mention of an IANA registry nor a 71 requirement for BPv7 agents to be extensible in how they handle 72 Administrative Record types. The BPv7 specification also did not 73 discriminate between code point reservations and unassigned ranges 74 for Administrative Record types. 76 This document updates BPv7 to explicitly use the IANA Administrative 77 Record type registry in Section 2. This document also makes a 78 reservation of high-valued code points for private or experimental 79 use to avoid collisions with assigned code points. 81 1.1. Scope 83 This document describes updates to the IANA Administrative Record 84 type sub-registry and how a BPv7 agent is supposed to use that 85 registry for identifying Administrative Record types. 87 This document does not specify how BPv6 and BPv7 can interoperate for 88 overlapping code points or how a specific code point is to be 89 interpreted either similarly or differently between Bundle Protocol 90 versions. It is up to each individual Administrative Record type 91 specification to define how it relates to each BP version. 93 1.2. Terminology 95 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 96 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 97 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 98 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all 99 capitals, as shown here. 101 2. Administrative Record Types Registry 103 This document updates the requirements in Section 6.1 of 104 [I-D.ietf-dtn-bpbis] to use an existing IANA registry and updates 105 that sub-registry in Section 4.1. 107 Instead of using the explicit list of types in Table 3 of 108 [I-D.ietf-dtn-bpbis], a BPv7 Agent SHALL interpret Administrative 109 Record type code values in accordance with the IANA "Bundle 110 Administrative Record Types" sub-registry under [IANA-BP] for entries 111 having a "Bundle Protocol Version" of 7. 113 3. Security Considerations 115 This document does not define any requirements or structures which 116 introduce new security considerations. 118 The existing security considerations of [I-D.ietf-dtn-bpbis] still 119 apply when using the IANA Administrative Record Types sub-registry. 121 4. IANA Considerations 123 This specification modifies a BPv6 sub-registry to extend BPv7. 125 4.1. Bundle Administrative Record Types 127 Within the "Bundle Protocol" registry [IANA-BP], the "Bundle 128 Administrative Record Types" sub-registry has been updated to include 129 a leftmost "Bundle Protocol Version" column. The existing sub- 130 registry entries have been updated to have BP versions as in the 131 following table. 133 +=================+=======+===============+======================+ 134 | Bundle Protocol | Value | Description | Reference | 135 | Version | | | | 136 +=================+=======+===============+======================+ 137 | 6,7 | 0 | Reserved | [RFC7116] | 138 +-----------------+-------+---------------+----------------------+ 139 | 6,7 | 1 | Bundle status | [RFC5050] | 140 | | | report | [I-D.ietf-dtn-bpbis] | 141 +-----------------+-------+---------------+----------------------+ 142 | 6 | 2 | Custody | [RFC5050] | 143 | | | signal | | 144 +-----------------+-------+---------------+----------------------+ 145 | 6,7 | 3-15 | Unassigned | | 146 +-----------------+-------+---------------+----------------------+ 148 Table 1 150 Within the "Bundle Protocol" registry [IANA-BP], the following 151 entries have been added to the "Bundle Administrative Record Types" 152 sub-registry. 154 +=================+============+==================+===============+ 155 | Bundle Protocol | Value | Description | Reference | 156 | Version | | | | 157 +=================+============+==================+===============+ 158 | 7 | 16-65535 | Unassigned | | 159 +-----------------+------------+------------------+---------------+ 160 | 7 | greater | Reserved for | This | 161 | | than 65535 | Private or | specification | 162 | | | Experimental Use | | 163 +-----------------+------------+------------------+---------------+ 165 Table 2 167 5. Acknowledgments 169 6. References 171 6.1. Normative References 173 [IANA-BP] IANA, "Bundle Protocol", 174 . 176 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 177 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 178 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 179 . 181 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 182 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 183 May 2017, . 185 [I-D.ietf-dtn-bpbis] 186 Burleigh, S., Fall, K., and E. J. Birrane, "Bundle 187 Protocol Version 7", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, 188 draft-ietf-dtn-bpbis-31, 25 January 2021, 189 . 192 6.2. Informative References 194 [RFC5050] Scott, K. and S. Burleigh, "Bundle Protocol 195 Specification", RFC 5050, DOI 10.17487/RFC5050, November 196 2007, . 198 [RFC7116] Scott, K. and M. Blanchet, "Licklider Transmission 199 Protocol (LTP), Compressed Bundle Header Encoding (CBHE), 200 and Bundle Protocol IANA Registries", RFC 7116, 201 DOI 10.17487/RFC7116, February 2014, 202 . 204 Author's Address 206 Brian Sipos 207 The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory 208 11100 Johns Hopkins Rd. 209 Laurel, MD 20723 210 United States of America 212 Email: brian.sipos+ietf@gmail.com