[Docs] [txt|pdf] [draft-daigle-rfc9...] [Diff1] [Diff2]

DRAFT STANDARD

Network Working Group                                          L. Daigle
Request for Comments: 3912                                VeriSign, Inc.
Obsoletes: 954, 812                                       September 2004
Category: Standards Track


                      WHOIS Protocol Specification

Status of this Memo

   This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
   Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
   improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
   Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
   and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).

Abstract

   This document updates the specification of the WHOIS protocol,
   thereby obsoleting RFC 954.  The update is intended to remove the
   material from RFC 954 that does not have to do with the on-the-wire
   protocol, and is no longer applicable in today's Internet.  This
   document does not attempt to change or update the protocol per se, or
   document other uses of the protocol that have come into existence
   since the publication of RFC 954.

1.  Introduction

   WHOIS is a TCP-based transaction-oriented query/response protocol
   that is widely used to provide information services to Internet
   users.  While originally used to provide "white pages" services and
   information about registered domain names, current deployments cover
   a much broader range of information services.  The protocol delivers
   its content in a human-readable format.  This document updates the
   specification of the WHOIS protocol, thereby obsoleting RFC 954 [1].

   For historic reasons, WHOIS lacks many of the protocol design
   attributes, for example internationalisation and strong security,
   that would be expected from any recently-designed IETF protocol.
   This document does not attempt to rectify any of those shortcomings.
   Instead, this memo documents the WHOIS protocol as it is.  In some
   areas, this document does document particular well known shortcomings
   of the WHOIS protocol.  The discussion of possible protocols to carry
   out these functions, with updated capabilities to address the



Daigle                      Standards Track                     [Page 1]

RFC 3912              WHOIS Protocol Specification        September 2004


   shortcomings, is being addressed in a separate IETF activity (CRISP
   Working Group).

2.  Protocol Specification

   A WHOIS server listens on TCP port 43 for requests from WHOIS
   clients.  The WHOIS client makes a text request to the WHOIS server,
   then the WHOIS server replies with text content.  All requests are
   terminated with ASCII CR and then ASCII LF.  The response might
   contain more than one line of text, so the presence of ASCII CR or
   ASCII LF characters does not indicate the end of the response.  The
   WHOIS server closes its connection as soon as the output is finished.
   The closed TCP connection is the indication to the client that the
   response has been received.

3.  Protocol Example

   If one places a request of the WHOIS server located at whois.nic.mil
   for information about "Smith", the packets on the wire will look
   like:

   client                           server at whois.nic.mil

   open TCP   ---- (SYN) ------------------------------>
              <---- (SYN+ACK) -------------------------
   send query ---- "Smith<CR><LF>" -------------------->
   get answer <---- "Info about Smith<CR><LF>" ---------
              <---- "More info about Smith<CR><LF>" ----
   close      <---- (FIN) ------------------------------
              ----- (FIN) ----------------------------->

4.  Internationalisation

   The WHOIS protocol has not been internationalised.  The WHOIS
   protocol has no mechanism for indicating the character set in use.
   Originally, the predominant text encoding in use was US-ASCII.  In
   practice, some WHOIS servers, particularly those outside the USA,
   might be using some other character set either for requests, replies,
   or both.  This inability to predict or express text encoding has
   adversely impacted the interoperability (and, therefore, usefulness)
   of the WHOIS protocol.

5.  Security Considerations

   The WHOIS protocol has no provisions for strong security.  WHOIS
   lacks mechanisms for access control, integrity, and confidentiality.
   Accordingly, WHOIS-based services should only be used for information
   which is non-sensitive and intended to be accessible to everyone.



Daigle                      Standards Track                     [Page 2]

RFC 3912              WHOIS Protocol Specification        September 2004


   The absence of such security mechanisms means this protocol would not
   normally be acceptable to the IETF at the time of this writing.

6.  Acknowledgements

   Ran Atkinson created an earlier version of this document.  Ken
   Harrenstien, Mary Stahl, and Elizabeth Feinler were the authors of
   the original Draft Standard for WHOIS.

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [1]  Harrenstien, K., Stahl, M., and E. Feinler, "NICNAME/WHOIS", RFC
        954, October 1985.

Author's Address

   Leslie Daigle
   VeriSign, Inc.
   21355 Ridgetop Circle
   Dulles, VA  20166
   US

   EMail: leslie@verisignlabs.com; leslie@thinkingcat.com


























Daigle                      Standards Track                     [Page 3]

RFC 3912              WHOIS Protocol Specification        September 2004


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).

   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
   contained in BCP 78, and at www.rfc-editor.org, and except as set
   forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/S HE
   REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE
   INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR
   IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
   THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Intellectual Property

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the ISOC's procedures with respect to rights in ISOC Documents can
   be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
   ipr@ietf.org.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.







Daigle                      Standards Track                     [Page 4]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.107, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/