[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04

Internet Engineering Task Force                             N. McPherson
Internet-Draft                                              1&1 IONOS SE
Intended status: Best Current Practice                        T. Sattler
Expires: May 9, 2019                                   November 10, 2018

                       Registry Reporting Repository
            draft-mcpherson-sattler-registry-reporting-repo-03

Abstract

   This document describes a domain name registry reporting repository
   used to provide reports to accredited domain name registrars.

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 May 9, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 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
   (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.

McPherson & Sattler        Expires May 9, 2019                  [Page 1]


Internet-Draft        Registry Reporting Repository        November 2018

Table of Contents
   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Terminology and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Internationalized Domain Names  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  Dates and Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  SFTP Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  SFTP Account  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  SFTP Directory Structure  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  SFTP Checksum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  SFTP Server Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   9.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   10. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   11. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     11.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     11.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Appendix A.  Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     A.1.  Change from 00 to 01  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     A.2.  Change from 01 to 02  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     A.3.  Change from 02 to 03  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Appendix B.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7

McPherson & Sattler        Expires May 9, 2019                  [Page 2]


Internet-Draft        Registry Reporting Repository        November 2018

1.  Introduction

   Modern top-level domain registries provide a number of detailed
   reports and documents that their registrars require on a daily,
   weekly and monthly basis. These most commonly include transaction
   reports, as well as lists containing currently unavailable domains
   and current premium domains. These reports are critical for
   registrars' businesses and play an important role in accounting and
   operations processes as well as in sales and marketing activities.
   In the current set-up registrars must download these reports from
   each registry's intranet in a different manner according to each
   registry's own document management set up.

   This document describes a domain registry reporting repository used
   to provide reports to accredited domain registrars.

2.  Terminology and Definitions

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] when
   specified in their uppercase forms.

2.1.  Internationalized Domain Names

   Top-Level Domains and Domain names contained in a directory or file
   name MUST be written as A-LABEL according to [RFC5890].

2.2.  Dates and Times

   All dates and times attribute values MUST be expressed in Universal
   Coordinated Time (UTC) using the Gregorian calendar. The extended
   date-time form using upper case "T" and "Z" characters defined in ISO
   8601 [RFC3339] MUST be used to represent date-time values.

   One day is defined as one day in UTC+0. Therefore, months and years
   will also be calculated on this basis.

3.  SFTP Server

   Each domain name registry sets up and manages a SFTP
   (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSH_File_Transfer_Protocol) server.
   Every SFTP server MUST be reachable through a generic URI, such as
   sftp://registry.example, and MUST listen on port 22.

   IP whitelisting to reach this SFTP server is RECOMMENDED.

McPherson & Sattler        Expires May 9, 2019                  [Page 3]


Internet-Draft        Registry Reporting Repository        November 2018

4.  SFTP Account

   Each domain name registry MUST create one SFTP account for every
   accredited domain name registrar. If a registrar owns more than one
   registrar, then a registry SHOULD combine them in one account on
   request by the parent registrar or entity.

   The authentication for a SFTP account should be done with an
   username and key instead of a password.

5.  SFTP Directory Structure

   The home directory of a SFTP user MUST be its root. This can be
   achieved with e.g. chroot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chroot) and
   prevents that a SFTP user can access other directories that are not
   owned by themselves. All directories MUST be lowercase.

   Files in these directories MUST be stored in an appropriate
   subdirectory according to their creation date.

   /YYYY-MM/example.csv
   /YYYY-MM/domains/example.csv
   /YYYY-MM/foo/bar/example.csv

   YYYY  represents the year in which the file was created, format
         according to ISO 8601 [RFC3339]

   MM    represents the months in which the file was created, format
         according to ISO 8601 [RFC3339]

6.  SFTP Checksum

   All files stored on the SFTP server MUST have a sha256sum
   (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sha1sum) checksum.

   The file name with the checksum MUST be the same as the file name
   with the content extended with the suffix .sha256.

   File with content:   example.csv
   File with sha256sum: example.csv.sha256

7.  SFTP Server Maintenance

   Maintenance is important and necessary, especially to keep the SFTP
   server up to date and secure. It MUST be announced in advance. In
   this case the EPP Registry Maintenance Specification
   [I-D.sattler-epp-registry-maintenance] is RECOMMENDED to use. The
   notification notice MUST be send at least 7 days in advance.

8.  IANA Considerations

   This document has no IANA actions.

McPherson & Sattler        Expires May 9, 2019                  [Page 4]


Internet-Draft        Registry Reporting Repository        November 2018

9.  Security Considerations

   The registry reporting repository described in this document do not
   provide any security services beyond those described by SFTP. The
   security considerations described in these other specifications apply
   to this specification as well.

10.  Implementation Status

   Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this section and the reference to
   [RFC7942] before publication.

   This section records the status of known implementations of the
   protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this
   Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in [RFC7942].
   The description of implementations in this section is intended to
   assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to
   RFCs.  Please note that the listing of any individual implementation
   here does not imply endorsement by the IETF.  Furthermore, no effort
   has been spent to verify the information presented here that was
   supplied by IETF contributors.  This is not intended as, and must not
   be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their
   features.  Readers are advised to note that other implementations may
   exist.

   According to [RFC7942], "this will allow reviewers and working groups
   to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of
   running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation
   and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature. It
   is up to the individual working groups to use this information as
   they see fit".

   Add implementation details once available.

11.  References

11.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC5890]  Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for
              Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework",
              RFC 5890, August 2010,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5890>.

McPherson & Sattler        Expires May 9, 2019                  [Page 5]


Internet-Draft        Registry Reporting Repository        November 2018

11.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.sattler-epp-registry-maintenance]
              Sattler, T., Roger, C. and Kolker, J., "Registry
              Maintenance Notifications for the Extensible Provisioning
              Protocol (EPP)", <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-
              sattler-epp-registry-maintenance> (work in progress), July
              2018

   [RFC3339]  Klyne, G., Ed. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the
              Internet: Timestamps", RFC 3339, July 2002,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3339>.

   [RFC7942]  Sheffer, Y. and Farrel, A., "Improving Awareness of
              Running Code: The Implementation Status Section", RFC
              7942, July 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.

Appendix A.  Change History

A.1.  Change from 00 to 01

   Added reference to IDN A-LABEL. Added clarification on date
   delimitation. Added checksum requirement.

A.2.  Change from 01 to 02

   Updated Neal's author details.

A.3.  Change from 02 to 03

   Fixed formatting of the table of contents.

McPherson & Sattler        Expires May 9, 2019                  [Page 6]


Internet-Draft        Registry Reporting Repository        November 2018

Appendix B.  Acknowledgements

   The authors wish to thank the following persons for their feedback
   and suggestions (sorted alphabetically by company):

   * Thomas Keller, 1&1 IONOS
   * James Galvin, Afilias
   * Andreas Huber, united-domains

Authors' Addresses

   Neal McPherson
   1&1 IONOS SE
   Ernst-Frey-Str. 5
   76135 Karlsruhe
   DE

   Email: neal.mcpherson@ionos.com
   URI:   https://www.ionos.com

   Tobias Sattler

   Email: tobias.sattler@me.com
   URI:   https://tobiassattler.com

McPherson & Sattler        Expires May 9, 2019                  [Page 7]

Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.128b, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/