ntp R. Salz Internet-Draft Akamai Technologies Intended status: Informational 22 December 2020 Expires: 25 June 2021 The update registries draft draft-rsalz-update-registries-00 Abstract The Network Time Protocol (NTP) and Network Time Security (NTS) documents define a number of assigned number registries, collectively called the NTP registries. Some registries have wrong values, some registries do not follow current common practice, and some are just right. For the sake of completeness, this document defines all current registries. Discussion Venues This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC. Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at https://github.com/richsalz/draft-rsalz-update-registries. 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 https://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 25 June 2021. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. Salz Expires 25 June 2021 [Page 1] Internet-Draft The update registries draft December 2020 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ license-info) in effect on the date of 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. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Existing Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. Reference ID, Kiss-o'-Death . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2. Extension Field Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.3. Network Time Security Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. New Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. IANA Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.1. NTP Reference Identifier Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.2. NTP Kiss-o'-Death Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.3. NTP Extension Field Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.4. Network Time Security Key Establishment Record Types . . 8 4.5. Network Time Security Next Protocols . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.6. Network Time Security Error Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.7. Network Time Security Warning Codes . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1. Introduction The Network Time Protocol (NTP) and Network Time Security (NTS) documents define a number of assigned number registries, collectively called the NTP registries. Some registries have wrong values, some registries do not follow current common practice, and some are just right. For the sake of completeness, this document defines all current registries. The bulk of this document can be divded into two parts: * First, each registry, its defining document, and a summary of its syntax is defined. * Second, the revised format and entries for each registry are defined. Salz Expires 25 June 2021 [Page 2] Internet-Draft The update registries draft December 2020 2. Existing Registries This section describes the registries and the rules for them. It is intended to be a short summary of the syntax and registration requirements for each registry. The semantics and protocol processing rules for each registry - that is, how an implementation acts when sending or receiving any of the fields - is not described here. 2.1. Reference ID, Kiss-o'-Death [RFC5905] defined two registries, the Reference ID in Section 7.3, and the Kiss-o'-Death in Section 7.4. Both of these are four ASCII characters, left justified and padded with zero's. Entries that start with 0x58, the ASCII letter uppercase X, are reserved for private experimentation and development. Both registries are first- come first-served. The formal request to define the registries is in Section 16. Section 7.5 of [RFC5905] defined the on-the-wire format of extension fields but did not create a registry for it. 2.2. Extension Field Types [RFC5906] mentioned the Extension Field Types registry, and defined it indirectly by defining 30 extensions (15 each for request and response) in Section 13. It did not provide a formal definition of the columns in the registry. [RFC7821] added a new entry, Checksum Complement, to the Extension Field Types registry. [RFC7822] clarified the processing rules for Extension Field Types, particularly around the interaction with the Message Authentication Code (MAC) field. [RFC8573] changed the cryptography used in the MAC field. The following problems exists with the current registry: * Many of the entries in the Extension Field Types registry have swapped nibbles (half of a byte), * Some values were mistakenly re-used. Salz Expires 25 June 2021 [Page 3] Internet-Draft The update registries draft December 2020 2.3. Network Time Security Registries [RFC8915] defines the Network Time Security (NTS) protocol. Sections 7.1 through 7.5 (inclusive) added entries to existing regisries. Section 7.6 created a new registry, NTS Key Establishment Record Types, that partitions the assigned numbers into three different registration policies: IETF Review, Specification Required, and Private or Experimental Use. Section 7.7 created a new registry, NTS Next Protocols, that similarly partitions the assigned numbers. Section 7.8 created two new registries, NTS Error Codes and NTS Warning Codes. Both regisries are also partitioned the same way. 3. New Registries The following general guidelines apply to all registries defined here: * Every entry reserves a partition for private use and experimentation. * Registries with ASCII fields are now limited to uppercase letters; fields starting with 0x2D, the ASCII minus sign, are reserved for private use. * The policy for every registry is now specification required, as defined in Section 4.6 of [RFC8126]. The IESG is requested to choose three designated experts, with two being required to approve a registry change. Each entry described in the below sub-sections is intended to completely replace the existing entry with the same name. 4. IANA Consideration 4.1. NTP Reference Identifier Codes The registration procedure is changed to specification required. The Note is changed to read as follows: * Codes beginning with the character "-" are reserved for experimentation and development. IANA cannot assign them. Salz Expires 25 June 2021 [Page 4] Internet-Draft The update registries draft December 2020 The columns are defined as follows: * ID (required): a four-byte value padded on the right with zero's. Each value must be an ASCII uppercase letter or minus sign * Clock source (required): A brief text description of the ID * Reference (required): the publication defining the ID. The existing entries are left unchanged. 4.2. NTP Kiss-o'-Death Codes The registration procedure is changed to specification required. The Note is changed to read as follows: * Codes beginning with the character "-" are reserved for experimentation and development. IANA cannot assign them. The columns are defined as follows: * ID (required): a four-byte value padded on the right with zero's. Each value must be an ASCII uppercase letter or minus sign. * Meaning source (required): A brief text description of the ID. * Reference (required): the publication defining the ID. The existing entries are left unchanged. 4.3. NTP Extension Field Types The registration procedure is changed to specification required. The reference should have "RFC5906" added; if only one reference is possible, replace the existing 5905 with 5906. The following Note is added: * Field Types in the range 0xD000 throught 0xFFFF, inclusive, are reserved for experimentation and development. IANA cannot assign them. Both NTS Cookie and Autokey Message Request have the same Field Type; in practice this is not a problem as the field semantics will be determined by other parts of the message. The columns are defined as follows: Salz Expires 25 June 2021 [Page 5] Internet-Draft The update registries draft December 2020 * Field Type (required): A four-byte value in hexadecimal. * Meaning (required): A brief text description of the field type. * Reference (required): the publication defining the field type. The table is replaced with the following entries. Note that the intent is that the second and fourth digits in the Field Type column are switched. +============+==============================+=======================+ | Field Type | Meaning | Reference | +============+==============================+=======================+ | 0x0104 | Unique Identifier | RFC 8915, Section 5.3 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x0200 | No-Operation Request | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x0201 | Association Message Request | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x0202 | Certificate Message Request | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x0203 | Cookie Message Request | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x0204 | NTS Cookie | RFC 8915, Section 5.4 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x0204 | Autokey Message Request | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x0205 | Leapseconds Message Request | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x0206 | Sign Message Request | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x0207 | IFF Identity Message | RFC 5906 | | | Request | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x0208 | GQ Identity Message Request | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x0209 | MV Identity Message Request | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x8200 | No-Operation Response | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x0304 | NTS Cookie Placeholder | RFC 8915, Section 5.5 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x0404 | NTS Authenticator and | RFC 8915, Section 5.6 | | | Encrypted Extension Fields | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x8201 | Association Message | RFC 5906 | | | Response | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ Salz Expires 25 June 2021 [Page 6] Internet-Draft The update registries draft December 2020 | 0x8202 | Certificate Message | RFC 5906 | | | Response | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x8203 | Cookie Message Response | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x8204 | Autokey Message Response | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x8205 | Leapseconds Message | RFC 5906 | | | Response | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x8206 | Sign Message Response | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x8207 | IFF Identity Message | RFC 5906 | | | Response | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x8208 | GQ Identity Message | RFC 5906 | | | Response | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0x8209 | MV Identity Message | RFC 5906 | | | Response | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0xC200 | No-Operation Error Response | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0xC201 | Association Message Error | RFC 5906 | | | Response | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0xC202 | Certificate Message Error | RFC 5906 | | | Response | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0xC203 | Cookie Message Error | RFC 5906 | | | Response | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0xC204 | Autokey Message Error | RFC 5906 | | | Response | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0xC205 | Leapseconds Message Error | RFC 5906 | | | Response | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0xC206 | Sign Message Error Response | RFC 5906 | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0xC207 | IFF Identity Message Error | RFC 5906 | | | Response | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0xC208 | GQ Identity Message Error | RFC 5906 | | | Response | | +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ | 0xC209 | MV Identity Message Error | RFC 5906 | | | Response | | Salz Expires 25 June 2021 [Page 7] Internet-Draft The update registries draft December 2020 +------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+ Table 1 4.4. Network Time Security Key Establishment Record Types The registration procedure is changed to specification required. The following note should be added: * Record type numbers in the range 0x4000 through 0x7FFF, inclusive, are reserved for experimentation and development. IANA cannot assign them. The existing entries are left unchanged. Should we remove the Unassigned and Reserved rows? Should we convert the numbers to hex? 4.5. Network Time Security Next Protocols The registration procedure is changed to specification required. The following note should be added: * Record type numbers in the range 0x4000 through 0x7FFF, inclusive, are reserved for experimentation and development. IANA cannot assign them. The existing entries are left unchanged. Should we remove the Unassigned and Reserved rows? Should we convert the numbers to hex? 4.6. Network Time Security Error Codes The registration procedure is changed to specification required. The following note should be added: * Record type numbers in the range 0x4000 through 0x7FFF, inclusive, are reserved for experimentation and development. IANA cannot assign them. The existing entries are left unchanged. Should we remove the Unassigned and Reserved rows? 4.7. Network Time Security Warning Codes The registration procedure is changed to specification required. The following note should be added: Salz Expires 25 June 2021 [Page 8] Internet-Draft The update registries draft December 2020 * Record type numbers in the range 0x4000 through 0x7FFF, inclusive, are reserved for experimentation and development. IANA cannot assign them. The existing entries are left unchanged. Should we remove the Unassigned and Reserved rows? Can IANA handle an empty table? 5. Acknowledgements The members of the NTP Working Group helped a great deal. Notable contributors include. * Miroslav Lichvar, RedHat * Daniel Franke, Akamai Technologies * Danny Mayer, Network Time Foundation And thanks to Harlen Stenn for providing popcorn. 6. Normative References [RFC5905] Mills, D., Martin, J., Ed., Burbank, J., and W. Kasch, "Network Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms Specification", RFC 5905, DOI 10.17487/RFC5905, June 2010, . [RFC5906] Haberman, B., Ed. and D. Mills, "Network Time Protocol Version 4: Autokey Specification", RFC 5906, DOI 10.17487/RFC5906, June 2010, . [RFC7821] Mizrahi, T., "UDP Checksum Complement in the Network Time Protocol (NTP)", RFC 7821, DOI 10.17487/RFC7821, March 2016, . [RFC7822] Mizrahi, T. and D. Mayer, "Network Time Protocol Version 4 (NTPv4) Extension Fields", RFC 7822, DOI 10.17487/RFC7822, March 2016, . [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, . Salz Expires 25 June 2021 [Page 9] Internet-Draft The update registries draft December 2020 [RFC8573] Malhotra, A. and S. Goldberg, "Message Authentication Code for the Network Time Protocol", RFC 8573, DOI 10.17487/RFC8573, June 2019, . [RFC8915] Franke, D., Sibold, D., Teichel, K., Dansarie, M., and R. Sundblad, "Network Time Security for the Network Time Protocol", RFC 8915, DOI 10.17487/RFC8915, September 2020, . Author's Address Rich Salz Akamai Technologies Email: rsalz@akamai.com Salz Expires 25 June 2021 [Page 10]