Internet Architecture Board (IAB) R. Housley (editor) Internet-Draft Vigil Security Intended status: Informational O. Kolkman (editor) Internet Society Expires: 22 May 2015 18 November 2014 Principles for Operation of Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Registries draft-iab-iana-principles-00 Abstract This document provides principles for the operation of Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) registries. Note: This is Internet-Draft was developed by the IAB IANA Evolution Program, and it should be discussed on the InternetGovtech@iab.org mail list. See http://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/internetgovtech for subscription details. Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." This Internet-Draft will expire on 21 May 2015. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of Housley & Kolkman Expires 21 May 2015 [Page 1] Internet-Draft IANA Principles November 2014 publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. 0. Document Background {{{ RFC Editor: Please delete this section prior to publication. }}} This document is a split off from draft-iab-iana-framework-02. This document contains principles that were scattered in various places in the IANA Framework, pulling them into one place. The IANA Framework has been under discussion since February 2011. 1. Introduction The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and its predecessors have traditionally separated the publication of protocol specifications in immutable Request for Comments (RFCs) and the registries containing protocol parameters. The latter is maintained by a set of functions traditionally known collectively as the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA). Dating back to the earliest days of the Internet, specification publication and the registry operations were tightly coupled: Jon Postel of the Information Sciences Institute (ISI) of the University of Southern California (USC) was responsible for both RFC publication and IANA registry operation. This tight coupling has advantages, but it has never been a requirement. Indeed, today the RFC Editor and IANA registry operation are provided by different entities. Internet registries are critical to the operation of the Internet, since they provide a definitive record of the value and meaning of identifiers that protocols use when communicating with each other. Almost every Internet protocol makes use of registries in some form. At the time of writing, the IANA maintains more than two thousand protocol parameter registries. Internet registries hold protocol identifiers consisting of constants and other well-known values used by Internet protocols. These values can be numbers, strings, addresses, and so on. They are uniquely assigned for one particular purpose or use. Identifiers can be maintained in a central list (such as a list of cryptographic algorithms) or they can be hierarchically allocated and assigned by separate entities at different points in the hierarchy (such as IP addresses and domain names). Housley & Kolkman Expires 21 May 2015 [Page 2] Internet-Draft IANA Principles November 2014 The registry system is built on trust and mutual cooperation. The use of the registries is voluntary and is not enforced by mandates or certification policies. While the use of registries is voluntary, it is noted that the success of the Internet creates enormous pressure to use Internet protocols and the registries associated with them. This document provides principles for the operation of IANA registries, ensuring that protocol identifiers have consistent meanings and interpretations across all implementations and deployments, and thus providing the necessary trust in the registries. 2. Principles for the Operation of IANA Registries The following key principles underscore the successful functioning of the IANA registries, and they provide a foundation for trust in those registries: Unique: The same protocol identifier must not be used for more than one purpose. Stable: Protocol identifier assignment must be lasting. Predictable: The process for making assignments must be predictable. Public Publication: The protocol identifiers must be published in a manner that makes them available to everyone in selected well- known locations. Open: The process that sets the policy for protocol identifier assignment and registration must be open to all interested parties. Transparent: The protocol registries and their associated policies should be developed in a transparent manner. Accountable: Registry policy development and registry operations need to be accountable to the affected community. 3. Discussion The principles discussed in Section 2 provide trust and confidence in the IANA registries. 3.1. Unique, Stable, and Predictable Protocol identifier assignment and registration must be unique, stable, and predictable. Developers, vendors, customers, and users Housley & Kolkman Expires 21 May 2015 [Page 3] Internet-Draft IANA Principles November 2014 depend on the registries for unique protocol identifiers that are assigned in a stable and predictable manner. A protocol identifier may only be reassigned for a different purpose after due consideration of the impact of such a reassignment, and if possible, with the consent of the original assignee. 3.2. Public Publication Once assigned, the protocol identifiers must be published in a manner that makes them available to everyone. The use of a consistent publication location builds confidence in the registry. This does not mean that the publication location can never change, but it does mean that it must change infrequently and only after adequate prior notice. 3.3. Open and Transparent The process that sets the policy for protocol identifier assignment and registration must be open to all interested parties and operate in a transparent manner. For many registries there is a de-facto separation of the policy setting and the evaluation of the policy that takes place at implementation. Splitting those roles can expose instances where policies lack of clarity, which provides helpful feedback to allow those policies to be improved. In addition, this separation prevents the risks of the policy evaluation from being burdened with (perceptions of) favoritism and unfairness. 3.4. Accountable The process that sets the policy for protocol identifiers and the operation of the registries must be accountable to the parties that rely on the protocol identifiers. Oversight is needed to ensure these are properly serving the affected community. In practice accountability mechanisms may be defined by contract, memoranda of understanding, or service level agreements (SLAs). An oversight body is held accountable to the wider community by different mechanisms, for instance recall and appeal processes. For protocol parameters [RFC6220], the general oversight over the IANA function is performed by the IAB as a chartered responsibility from [RFC2850] (also see Section 5.4). In addition the IAOC, a body responsible for IETF administrative and financial matters [RFC4071], maintains an SLA with ICANN, thereby specifying the operational requirements with respect to the coordination of evaluation, and the maintenance and publication of the registries. Both the IAB and the Housley & Kolkman Expires 21 May 2015 [Page 4] Internet-Draft IANA Principles November 2014 IAOC are accountable to the larger Internet community and are being held accountable through the IETF Nomcom process [BCP10]. 4. Security Considerations Internet Registries are critical to elements of Internet security. The principles described in this document are necessary for the Internet community to place trust in the IANA registries.. 5. Contributors and Acknowledgements This text has been developed within the IAB IANA Evolution Program. The ideas and many text fragments, and corrections came from or were inspired on comments from: Bernard Aboba, Jaap Akkerhuis, Jari Arkko, Marcelo Bagnulo, Mark Blanchet, Brian Carpenter, David Conrad, Steve Crocker, John Curran, Alissa Cooper, Leslie Daigle, Elise Gerich, John Klensin, Bertrand de La Chapelle, Danny McPherson, George Michaelson, Thomas Narten, Andrei Robachevsky, and Greg Wood. Further inspiration and input was drawn from various meetings with IETF and other Internet community (RIRs, ISOC, W3C, IETF, and IAB) leadership. It should not be assumed that those acknowledged endorse the resulting text. 6. IANA Considderations This document does not contain updates to any registries. 7. Informative References [BCP10] Galvin, J., Ed., "IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP 10, RFC 3777, June 2004. Dawkins, S., "Nominating Committee Process: Earlier Announcement of Open Positions and Solicitation of Volunteers", BCP 10, RFC 5633, August 2009. [RFC2850] Internet Architecture Board and B. Carpenter, "Charter of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB)", BCP 39, RFC 2850, May 2000. [RFC2860] Carpenter, B., Baker, F., and M. Roberts, "Memorandum of Understanding Concerning the Technical Work of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority", RFC 2860, June 2000. [RFC4071] Austein, R. and B. Wijnen, "Structure of the IETF Housley & Kolkman Expires 21 May 2015 [Page 5] Internet-Draft IANA Principles November 2014 Administrative Support Activity (IASA)", BCP 101, RFC 4071, April 2005. [RFC6220] McPherson, D., Kolkman, O., Klensin, J., Huston, G., and Internet Architecture Board, "Defining the Role and Function of IETF Protocol Parameter Registry Operators", RFC 6220, April 2011. Authors' Addresses Russ Housley 918 Spring Knoll Drive Herndon, VA 20170 USA Email: housley@vigilsec.com Olaf Kolkman Science Park 400 Amsterdam 1098 XH The Netherlands EMail: kolkman@isoc.org Housley & Kolkman Expires 21 May 2015 [Page 6]