idnits 2.17.1 draft-wendt-modern-drip-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 -- The document date (July 03, 2017) is 2479 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 7230 (Obsoleted by RFC 9110, RFC 9112) Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 modern C. Wendt 3 Internet-Draft H. Bellur 4 Intended status: Standards Track Comcast 5 Expires: January 4, 2018 July 03, 2017 7 Distributed Registry Protocol (DRiP) 8 draft-wendt-modern-drip-02 10 Abstract 12 This document describes a protocol for allowing a distributed set of 13 nodes to synchronize a set of information in real-time with minimal 14 amount of delay. This is useful for registry types of information 15 like identity and telephone numbers with associated routing and 16 ownership information and could be extended to support other 17 distributed real-time information updates as well. 19 Status of This Memo 21 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 22 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 24 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 25 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 26 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 27 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 29 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 30 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 31 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 32 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 34 This Internet-Draft will expire on January 4, 2018. 36 Copyright Notice 38 Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 39 document authors. All rights reserved. 41 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 42 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 43 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 44 publication of this document. Please review these documents 45 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 46 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 47 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 48 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 49 described in the Simplified BSD License. 51 Table of Contents 53 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 54 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 55 3. DRiP Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 56 4. Distributed MESH Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 57 5. DRiP procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 58 5.1. Distributed Registry Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 59 5.2. Node State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 60 5.2.1. API - POST /node/:nodeid/active . . . . . . . . . . . 5 61 5.2.2. API - POST /node/:nodeid/inactive . . . . . . . . . . 5 62 5.2.3. API - GET /state . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 63 5.3. Custom HTTP header fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 64 5.4. Key-Value Data Propagation Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 65 5.5. Key-Value Data Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 66 5.5.1. Voting Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 67 5.5.2. Commit Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 68 5.6. Node Sync Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 69 5.6.1. API - PUT /sync/node/:nodeid . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 70 5.7. Heartbeat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 71 5.7.1. API - POST /heartbeat/node/:nodeid . . . . . . . . . 16 72 5.8. Key-Value Data Update Entitlement Verification . . . . . 16 73 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 74 6.1. HTTPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 75 6.2. Authorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 76 6.3. Payload Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 77 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 78 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 79 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 80 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 81 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 82 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 84 1. Introduction 86 This document describes the Distributed Registry Protocol (DRiP). 87 DRiP defines a set of peer protocols for how an arbitrary number of 88 nodes arranged in a distributed mesh architecture can be used to 89 synchronize data in real-time across a network. 91 2. Terminology 93 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 94 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 95 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 97 Initiator Node - A node that initiates data propagation. 99 Receiver Node - A node that forwards the propagated key-value data. 101 3. DRiP Overview 103 DRiP uses a mix of a gossip protocol with update counters for 104 distribution of key-value data with the addition of a voting system 105 to avoid race conditions on writing of key-value data. 107 4. Distributed MESH Architecture 109 The DRiP architecture is based on a peer-to-peer communication model 110 where a given node associated with a data store is not necessarily 111 aware of the total number of nodes in the entire network. Minimally, 112 every node should reachable by at least one multi-node path from 113 every other node. Each node in the DRiP network maintains a list of 114 peer nodes from which it receives and transmits updates. Information 115 is propagated by forwarding to it's peer nodes until the information 116 received by a node has already been received. 118 ___ ___ ___ ___ 119 |DB |_________|DB | |DB |_________|DB | 120 |___| |___| |___| |___| 121 | Data | | Data | 122 | Store | | Store | 123 _|_ Cluster _|_ _|_ Cluster _|_ 124 |DB |_________|DB | |DB |_________|DB | 125 |___| |___| |___| |___| 126 \ / 127 \ / 128 _\___ DRIP _ /__ 129 |Node |------------|Node | 130 | A | HTTPS | C | 131 |_____| |_____| 132 \H H/ 133 D\T T/D 134 R\T P/R 135 I\P P/I 136 P\S S/P 137 __\__ / DRIP _____ 138 |Node |------------|Node | 139 | B | HTTPS | D | 140 |_____| |_____| 141 / / 142 ___ ___ / __/_ ___ 143 |DB |_________|DB | |DB |_________|DB | 144 |___| |___| |___| |___| 145 | Data | | Data | 146 | Store | | Store | 147 _|_ Cluster _|_ _|_ Cluster _|_ 148 |DB |_________|DB | |DB |_________|DB | 149 |___| |___| |___| |___| 151 Distributed Mesh Architecture 153 5. DRiP procedures 155 5.1. Distributed Registry Rules 157 All nodes in the distributed mesh MUST agree upon a specific key- 158 value data model. The choice of data store is implementation 159 specific. 161 All nodes MUST be configured with at least one peer node before 162 propagation. 164 A node MUST ignore any updates or commands it receives from other 165 nodes that are not configured as peer nodes. 167 All nodes MUST send a periodic heartbeat or keep-alive message via 168 HTTPS to the respective peer nodes. If a heartbeat is not received 169 the peer node is removed from the list of active peer nodes. 171 5.2. Node State 173 The peer node should maintain a state that defines whether it is 174 active, inactive, or synchronizing key-value data with a peer node. 176 The node should proactively tell it's peer nodes its state by sending 177 the following POST messages. The GET query is available for nodes to 178 query the state of peer nodes. 180 5.2.1. API - POST /node/:nodeid/active 182 Example (using cURL) 184 Request 186 $ curl -i -H "DRiP-Node-ID: nodeA" -H "Authorization: eyJ0e..." 187 -X POST https://nodearegistry.com/node/nodeA/active 189 Response 191 HTTP/1.1 200 OK 193 5.2.2. API - POST /node/:nodeid/inactive 195 Example (using cURL) 197 Request 199 $ curl -i -H "DRiP-Node-ID: nodeA" -H "Authorization: eyJ0e..." 200 -X POST https://nodearegistry.com/node/nodeA/inactive 202 Response 204 HTTP/1.1 200 OK 206 5.2.3. API - GET /state 208 Description: 210 A node should query the state of its peer node before it initiates a 211 sync operation. This request responds with either "active" or "sync" 212 or no response, if in "inactive" state. 214 Example (using cURL) 216 Request 218 $ curl -i -H "DRiP-Node-ID: nodeA" -H "Authorization: eyJ0e..." 219 -X GET https://nodearegistry.com/state 221 Response 223 HTTP/1.1 200 OK with the following JSON object. 225 +----------+----------------------------------+ 226 | Property | Description | 227 +----------+----------------------------------+ 228 | state | "active" or "inactive" or "sync" | 229 +----------+----------------------------------+ 231 5.3. Custom HTTP header fields 233 Custom HTTP header fields will be used to carry node specific 234 information. 236 +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+ 237 | Field Name | Description | 238 +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+ 239 | DRiP-Node-ID | Each node in the mesh MUST have a unique | 240 | | identifier. An Initiator node MUST set its own | 241 | | node ID as the field value. A Receiver Node MUST | 242 | | NOT change the DRiP-Node-ID field value as it | 243 | | forward the HTTPS request to its peer nodes. | 244 +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+ 246 Example: 247 DRiP-Node-ID: xyz 249 +---------------------+---------------------------------------------+ 250 | Field Name | Description | 251 +---------------------+---------------------------------------------+ 252 | DRiP-Node-Counter | Every node maintains a count of the number | 253 | | of times it initiates key-value data | 254 | | propagation. This counter MUST be an | 255 | | unsigned type, typically, a 64 bit integer. | 256 | | The Initiator node MUST set this count as | 257 | | the field value. A Receiver Node MUST NOT | 258 | | change the DRiP-Node-Counter field value as | 259 | | it forward the HTTPS request to its peer | 260 | | nodes. | 261 +---------------------+---------------------------------------------+ 263 Example: 264 DRiP-Node-Counter: 123 266 +-------------------------+-----------------------------------------+ 267 | Field Name | Description | 268 +-------------------------+-----------------------------------------+ 269 | DRiP-Node-Counter-reset | A node can reset the count (to zero) of | 270 | | the number of times it initiates key- | 271 | | value data propagation. If the counter | 272 | | value is reset, prior to initiating | 273 | | data propagation, then this field value | 274 | | MUST be set to true. Otherwise, it MUST | 275 | | be set to false, at all times. A | 276 | | typical use case to reset the counter | 277 | | value is when the counter (of unsigned | 278 | | type) value wraps around. The Initiator | 279 | | node MUST set this field value to | 280 | | either true or false. A Receiver Node | 281 | | MUST NOT change the DRiP-Node-Counter- | 282 | | reset field value as it forward the | 283 | | HTTPS request to its peer nodes. | 284 +-------------------------+-----------------------------------------+ 286 Example: 287 DRiP-Node-Counter-reset: false 289 +-------------------------+-----------------------------------------+ 290 | Field Name | Description | 291 +-------------------------+-----------------------------------------+ 292 | DRiP-Transaction-Type | The Initiator node MUST set this field | 293 | | value to be either "update" or "sync". | 294 | | A Receiver Node MUST NOT change the | 295 | | DRiP-Transaction-Type field value as it | 296 | | forward the HTTPS request to its peer | 297 | | nodes. | 298 +-------------------------+-----------------------------------------+ 300 Example: 301 DRiP-Transaction-Type: update 303 +-----------------------+-------------------------------------------+ 304 | Field Name | Description | 305 +-----------------------+-------------------------------------------+ 306 | DRiP-Sync-Complete | For sync transaction type, the Initiator | 307 | | node MUST set this field value to be | 308 | | true, if synchronization is complete. | 309 | | Otherwise, this field value MUST be set | 310 | | to false. | 311 +-----------------------+-------------------------------------------+ 313 Example: 314 DRiP-Sync-Complete: false 316 5.4. Key-Value Data Propagation Rules 318 A node propagates key-value data to all its peer nodes except the the 319 node from which it received data. For example, in Figure 1, when 320 node B receives key-value data from node A, it will propagate the 321 data received to nodes C and D but not back to node A. 323 For each transaction type (Update or Sync), the following set of 324 actions MUST take place when a node receives a HTTPS request with 325 propagated key-value data: 327 o If DRiP-Node-ID field value (in the HTTP header) contains 328 Initiator node ID that has never been seen, both DRiP-Node-ID and 329 DRiP-Node-Counter field values MUST be stored for future reference 330 and the key-value data is propagated to all peer nodes. 332 o If DRiP-Node-ID field value (in the HTTP header) matches with a 333 stored node ID and DRiP-Node-Counter-reset field value is false. 335 * The received key-value data MUST be propagated to the peer 336 nodes if DRiP-Node-Counter field value is greater than the 337 saved counter value. The DRiP-Node-Counter field value MUST be 338 saved as the new counter for the stored node ID. 340 * If DRiP-Node-Counter field value is less than or equal to saved 341 counter value, then the key-value data has already been 342 received and MUST NOT be propagated to peer nodes. This 343 ensures that propagation stops when all nodes have received the 344 key-value data from the Initiator node. 346 o If DRiP-Node-ID field value matches with a stored node ID and 347 DRiP-Node-Counter-reset field value is true: 349 * The received key-value data MUST be propagated to the peer 350 nodes. The DRiP-Node-Counter field value MUST be saved as the 351 new counter for the stored node ID. 353 5.5. Key-Value Data Update 355 When an Initiator node has new data it wants to propagate to the 356 distributed mesh, it initiates an Update. The Update consists of a 357 two-phase commit (2PC) procedure in order to guarantee there are no 358 race conditions for updating the same key's data, as well as for any 359 error conditions in the distributed mesh that would cause the update 360 to not complete for all nodes in the network. 362 The two phases are called the "voting" phase and the "commit" phase. 364 _________ 365 ----------------------->| | 366 | | Waiting | 367 | | For | 368 | ---------------------| Events | 369 | | (Update, |_________| 370 | | Start Timer) 371 | | -------------------------------- 372 | | | Received Update From Peer Node | 373 | | | | 374 | | ______________|_ If key matches an | 375 | | | | in-progress update | 376 | ----------->| | vote "no". | 377 | | Waiting For | Otherwise, vote "yes". | 378 | | Response From | | 379 | | Peer Nodes |<----------------------------- 380 | | | 381 | ----| |---- 382 | Timer | |________________| | 383 | Expired | | Received Votes 384 | | | From All Peer 385 | | | Nodes 386 | | _______________ | 387 | | | | | 388 | | | | | 389 | --->| |<--- 390 | | Validating | 391 | (If all Votes | Votes | 392 | are "YES", | | 393 | propagate | | 394 | commit) | | 395 ---------------|________________| 397 Update State Diagram 399 5.5.1. Voting Phase 401 The voting phase is the phase where all nodes are queried to "vote" 402 whether they are aware of any potential conflict that would cause the 403 transaction not to complete. 405 The Initiator node MUST set a timeout period to get response from its 406 peer nodes. 408 The peer nodes known to the initiator node will continue propagate 409 the information to their peer nodes and so on. However, these peer 410 nodes beyond the initiator node will no longer need to keep track of 411 the time interval for responses. A node will stop continuing to 412 propagate information when it determines it has received the same 413 information again. This can be determined by keeping track of the 414 counter and originating node id. 416 If all peer nodes vote "yes", then the second phase or commit phase 417 in the local node is initiated. If any node in the distributed mesh 418 votes "no" or if the timeout period expires and all peer nodes have 419 not responded, then the commit of the information MUST NOT be 420 completed. No action is taken for responses received after the 421 timeout period. 423 Note: The voting procedure is intentionally split into two separate 424 full HTTP transactions for reliability. 426 ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ 427 |DB |_________|DB | |DB |_________|DB | |DB |_________|DB | 428 |___| |___| |___| |___| |___| |___| 429 | Data | | Data | | Data | 430 | Store | | Store | | Store | 431 _|_ Cluster _|_ _|_ Cluster _|_ _|_ Cluster _|_ 432 |DB |_________|DB | |DB |_________|DB | |DB |_________|DB | 433 |___| |___| |___| |___| |___| |___| 434 \ \ | 435 \ \ | 436 _\___ Vote(HTTPS) _\___ Vote(HTTPS) |____ 437 |Node | <---------- |Node | ----------> |Node | 438 | B |---------------| A |---------------| C | 439 |_____| ----------> |_____| <---------- |_____| 440 Yes/No Yes/No 442 Voting Phase 444 5.5.1.1. API - POST /voting 445 Request: 447 POST /voting 449 Description: 451 A post from either Initiator node or subsequent peer nodes to request 452 a vote of "yes" or "no" whether the key-value data could be committed 453 without error or conflict. 455 Example (using cURL) 457 Request 459 $ curl -i -H "Content-Type: application/json" -H "DRiP-Node-ID: 460 nodeA" -H "DRiP-Node-Counter: 1234" -H 461 "DRiP-Node-Counter-reset: false" -X POST -d '{}' https://nodebregistry.com/voting 464 Response 466 HTTP/1.1 200 OK 468 5.5.1.2. POST /votingphase/node/:nodeid/response/:response 470 Request: 472 POST /voting/peernode/:nodeid/response/:response 474 Description: 476 A POST from peer node back to node with response of vote. 478 Example (using cURL) 480 Request 482 $ curl -i -X POST http://nodearegistry.com/node/nodeA/response/yes 484 Response 486 HTTP/1.1 200 OK 488 5.5.2. Commit Phase 490 The Initiator node, that originated the gossip, upon receiving a 491 successful aggregated "yes" vote from all the peer nodes should start 492 the commit phase. This node MUST commit the data to its data store. 494 Subsequently, this information is propagated to all the nodes so that 495 each node in the mesh will commit the same information in their 496 respective data stores. 498 ___ ___ ___ ___ 499 |DB |_________|DB | |DB |_________|DB | 500 |___| |___| |___| |___| 501 | Data | | Data | 502 | Store | | Store | 503 _|_ Cluster _|_ _|_ Cluster _|_ 504 |DB |_________|DB | |DB |_________|DB | 505 |___| |___| |___| |___| 506 \ / 507 \COMMIT /COMMIT 508 _\___ COMMIT _ /__ 509 |Node |------------|Node | 510 | A | HTTPS | C | 511 |_____| |_____| 512 \H H/ 513 \T T/ 514 COMMIT\T P/COMMIT 515 \P P/ 516 \S S/ 517 __\__ / COMMIT _____ 518 |Node |------------|Node | 519 | B | HTTPS | D | 520 |_____| |_____| 521 / / 522 /COMMIT /COMMIT 523 ___ ___/ _/__ ___ 524 |DB |_________|DB | |DB |_________|DB | 525 |___| |___| |___| |___| 526 | Data | | Data | 527 | Store | | Store | 528 _|_ Cluster _|_ _|_ Cluster _|_ 529 |DB |_________|DB | |DB |_________|DB | 530 |___| |___| |___| |___| 532 Commit Phase 534 5.5.2.1. API - POST /commit 535 Request: 537 POST /commit 539 Description: 541 A commit message is sent from Initiator or subsequent peer nodes to 542 signal the Receiver node to commit the data to its data store. 544 Example (using cURL) 546 Request 548 $ curl -i -H "Content-Type: application/json" -H "DRiP-Node-ID: 549 nodeA" -H "DRiP-Node-Counter: 1234" -H 550 "DRiP-Node-Counter-reset: false" -X POST -d 551 '' https://nodebregistry.com/commit 553 Response 555 HTTP/1.1 200 OK 557 5.6. Node Sync Operation 559 A node, either newly added to the distributed mesh or put back into 560 service after being inactive, will get the state of a peer node to 561 determine if it is in "active" state. If so, the node can 562 immediately initiate a Sync transaction. The peer node MUST start 563 propagating a comprehensive and complete set of key-value data from 564 its data store. 566 The two phase commit does NOT apply here as the contents of the 567 initiating node's data store is either outdated or empty. During 568 this phase (HTTPS requests received will have DRiP-Sync-Complete 569 field value set to false), this node SHOULD NOT become an Initiator 570 node to provision data. While this transaction is going on, this 571 node MUST vote "yes" to all real-time updates. The commits 572 corresponding to the Updates should also be completed and reflected 573 in the data store. 575 5.6.1. API - PUT /sync/node/:nodeid 576 Request: 578 PUT /sync/node/:nodeid 580 Description: 582 API call for initiating a full registry synchronization from node to 583 peer-node. 585 Example (using cURL) 587 Request 589 $ curl -i -H "DRiP-Node-ID: nodeA" -H "Authorization: eyJ0e..." 590 -X POST https://peernode.com/sync/node/nodeA 592 Response 594 HTTP/1.1 200 OK 596 5.7. Heartbeat 598 Periodic heartbeats are required for a node to determine it's 599 visibility to the rest of it's peer nodes and whether it should put 600 itself in "inactive" mode. The procedure for heartbeats is as 601 follows. 603 A node sends periodic heartbeat requests to its peer nodes with an 604 indication of its state. These heartbeat requests are not to be 605 propagated beyond the peer nodes. 607 If all of its peer nodes cannot be reached or do not respond with 608 200OK, then the node that sent the heartbeat request will set its own 609 state to "inactive". This is based on the reasonable assumption that 610 none of the peer nodes are able to communicate with this node until a 611 new heartbeat request is successful. Once in the inactive state, the 612 node will 614 o not propagate any incoming key-value data 616 o not update any incoming key-value data 618 o continue to send the periodic heartbeat requests to its peer 619 nodes. If any one responds with 200 OK, then the node will move 620 its state to "synchronizing" and will re-synchronize its data with 621 any active peer node as detailed in section 4.6 623 In addition, any one or more peer nodes that cannot be reached or did 624 not respond with 200 OK should not be used to propagate key-value 625 data until it responds (with 200 OK) to the heartbeat request. 627 5.7.1. API - POST /heartbeat/node/:nodeid 629 Example (using cURL) 631 Request 633 $ curl -i -H "DRiP-Node-ID: nodeA" -H "Authorization: eyJ0e..." 634 -X POST -d '' https://peernode.com/heartbeat/node/nodeA 636 Response 638 HTTP/1.1 200 OK 640 5.8. Key-Value Data Update Entitlement Verification 642 When a node owner would like to create or modify particular key-value 643 data, generally in the context of a registry, there MAY be a 644 verification procedure that key-value data write or modification can 645 be performed. This could include validating whether key-value data 646 is entitled to be written, modified or subsequently propagated based 647 on application policy. For example, identity or telephone number 648 ownership or porting. The exact mechanics of this are out of scope 649 of this document and are generally application specific. 651 6. Security Considerations 653 6.1. HTTPS 655 All nodes MUST perform HTTP transactions using TLS as defined in 656 [RFC7230]. 658 6.2. Authorization 660 All nodes MUST validate their authority to consume the HTTP APIs of a 661 peer node by adding a JSON Web Token (JWT) value [RFC7519] in the 662 Authorization request-header field. 664 The creation and verification of the JWT should be based on a digital 665 signature. For most distributed registry scenarios where the owner 666 of a node may not have a direct relationship with another node owner, 667 a PKI based certificate approach is highly suggested. For protection 668 against replay attacks, the claim set SHOULD contain an "iat" claim 669 and the signature should be verified to be signed by the expected 670 owner of the peer node. The "iat" claim identifies the time at which 671 the JWT was issued and can be used to validate when the time of the 672 transaction occurred. 674 6.3. Payload Validation 676 In addition to the DRiP level protocol protection, it is highly 677 suggested to sign and validate part or all of the JSON update 678 payloads to the originator of the update. DRiP does not define 679 anything regarding the contents of the payload, so this document does 680 not address this in any way. 682 7. IANA Considerations 684 None 686 8. Acknowledgements 688 We would like to thank you for your interest in this work. 690 9. References 692 9.1. Normative References 694 [RFC7230] Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer 695 Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing", 696 RFC 7230, DOI 10.17487/RFC7230, June 2014, 697 . 699 [RFC7519] Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web Token 700 (JWT)", RFC 7519, DOI 10.17487/RFC7519, May 2015, 701 . 703 9.2. Informative References 705 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 706 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 707 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 708 . 710 Authors' Addresses 712 Chris Wendt 713 Comcast 714 One Comcast Center 715 Philadelphia, PA 19103 716 USA 718 Email: chris-ietf@chriswendt.net 719 Harsha Bellur 720 Comcast 721 One Comcast Center 722 Philadelphia, PA 19103 723 USA 725 Email: Harsha_Bellur@cable.comcast.com