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

Versions: 00 01 02

modern                                                          C. Wendt
Internet-Draft                                                 H. Bellur
Intended status: Standards Track                                 Comcast
Expires: January 4, 2018                                   July 03, 2017


                  Distributed Registry Protocol (DRiP)
                       draft-wendt-modern-drip-02

Abstract

   This document describes a protocol for allowing a distributed set of
   nodes to synchronize a set of information in real-time with minimal
   amount of delay.  This is useful for registry types of information
   like identity and telephone numbers with associated routing and
   ownership information and could be extended to support other
   distributed real-time information updates as well.

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 January 4, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 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
   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




Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  DRiP Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Distributed MESH Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  DRiP procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     5.1.  Distributed Registry Rules  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     5.2.  Node State  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       5.2.1.  API - POST /node/:nodeid/active . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       5.2.2.  API - POST /node/:nodeid/inactive . . . . . . . . . .   5
       5.2.3.  API - GET /state  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     5.3.  Custom HTTP header fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     5.4.  Key-Value Data Propagation Rules  . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     5.5.  Key-Value Data Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       5.5.1.  Voting Phase  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       5.5.2.  Commit Phase  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     5.6.  Node Sync Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
       5.6.1.  API - PUT /sync/node/:nodeid  . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     5.7.  Heartbeat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
       5.7.1.  API - POST /heartbeat/node/:nodeid  . . . . . . . . .  16
     5.8.  Key-Value Data Update Entitlement Verification  . . . . .  16
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     6.1.  HTTPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     6.2.  Authorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     6.3.  Payload Validation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17

1.  Introduction

   This document describes the Distributed Registry Protocol (DRiP).
   DRiP defines a set of peer protocols for how an arbitrary number of
   nodes arranged in a distributed mesh architecture can be used to
   synchronize data in real-time across a network.

2.  Terminology

   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].



Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


   Initiator Node - A node that initiates data propagation.

   Receiver Node - A node that forwards the propagated key-value data.

3.  DRiP Overview

   DRiP uses a mix of a gossip protocol with update counters for
   distribution of key-value data with the addition of a voting system
   to avoid race conditions on writing of key-value data.

4.  Distributed MESH Architecture

   The DRiP architecture is based on a peer-to-peer communication model
   where a given node associated with a data store is not necessarily
   aware of the total number of nodes in the entire network.  Minimally,
   every node should reachable by at least one multi-node path from
   every other node.  Each node in the DRiP network maintains a list of
   peer nodes from which it receives and transmits updates.  Information
   is propagated by forwarding to it's peer nodes until the information
   received by a node has already been received.































Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


    ___           ___                         ___           ___
   |DB |_________|DB |                       |DB |_________|DB |
   |___|         |___|                       |___|         |___|
     |   Data      |                           |   Data      |
     |   Store     |                           |   Store     |
    _|_  Cluster  _|_                         _|_  Cluster  _|_
   |DB |_________|DB |                       |DB |_________|DB |
   |___|         |___|                       |___|         |___|
                    \                       /
                     \                     /
                     _\___     DRIP     _ /__
                    |Node |------------|Node |
                    |  A  |    HTTPS   |  C  |
                    |_____|            |_____|
                        \H           H/
                        D\T         T/D
                         R\T       P/R
                          I\P     P/I
                           P\S   S/P
                           __\__ /   DRIP     _____
                          |Node |------------|Node |
                          |  B  |   HTTPS    |  D  |
                          |_____|            |_____|
                         /                   /
      ___           ___ /                 __/_          ___
     |DB |_________|DB |                 |DB |_________|DB |
     |___|         |___|                 |___|         |___|
       |   Data      |                     |   Data      |
       |   Store     |                     |   Store     |
      _|_  Cluster  _|_                   _|_  Cluster  _|_
     |DB |_________|DB |                 |DB |_________|DB |
     |___|         |___|                 |___|         |___|

                    Distributed Mesh Architecture

5.  DRiP procedures

5.1.  Distributed Registry Rules

   All nodes in the distributed mesh MUST agree upon a specific key-
   value data model.  The choice of data store is implementation
   specific.

   All nodes MUST be configured with at least one peer node before
   propagation.

   A node MUST ignore any updates or commands it receives from other
   nodes that are not configured as peer nodes.



Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


   All nodes MUST send a periodic heartbeat or keep-alive message via
   HTTPS to the respective peer nodes.  If a heartbeat is not received
   the peer node is removed from the list of active peer nodes.

5.2.  Node State

   The peer node should maintain a state that defines whether it is
   active, inactive, or synchronizing key-value data with a peer node.

   The node should proactively tell it's peer nodes its state by sending
   the following POST messages.  The GET query is available for nodes to
   query the state of peer nodes.

5.2.1.  API - POST /node/:nodeid/active

   Example (using cURL)

   Request

    $ curl -i -H "DRiP-Node-ID: nodeA" -H "Authorization: eyJ0e..."
        -X POST https://nodearegistry.com/node/nodeA/active

   Response

    HTTP/1.1 200 OK

5.2.2.  API - POST /node/:nodeid/inactive

   Example (using cURL)

   Request

    $ curl -i -H "DRiP-Node-ID: nodeA" -H "Authorization: eyJ0e..."
        -X POST https://nodearegistry.com/node/nodeA/inactive

   Response

    HTTP/1.1 200 OK

5.2.3.  API - GET /state

   Description:

   A node should query the state of its peer node before it initiates a
   sync operation.  This request responds with either "active" or "sync"
   or no response, if in "inactive" state.





Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


   Example (using cURL)

   Request

    $ curl -i -H "DRiP-Node-ID: nodeA" -H "Authorization: eyJ0e..."
        -X GET https://nodearegistry.com/state

   Response

    HTTP/1.1 200 OK with the following JSON object.

            +----------+----------------------------------+
            | Property | Description                      |
            +----------+----------------------------------+
            |  state   | "active" or "inactive" or "sync" |
            +----------+----------------------------------+

5.3.  Custom HTTP header fields

   Custom HTTP header fields will be used to carry node specific
   information.

   +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+
   |   Field Name   | Description                                      |
   +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+
   |  DRiP-Node-ID  | Each node in the mesh MUST have a unique         |
   |                | identifier. An Initiator node MUST set its own   |
   |                | node ID as the field value. A Receiver Node MUST |
   |                | NOT change the DRiP-Node-ID field value as it    |
   |                | forward the HTTPS request to its peer nodes.     |
   +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+

   Example:
         DRiP-Node-ID: xyz

















Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


   +---------------------+---------------------------------------------+
   |      Field Name     | Description                                 |
   +---------------------+---------------------------------------------+
   |  DRiP-Node-Counter  | Every node maintains a count of the number  |
   |                     | of times it initiates key-value data        |
   |                     | propagation. This counter MUST be an        |
   |                     | unsigned type, typically, a 64 bit integer. |
   |                     | The Initiator node MUST set this count as   |
   |                     | the field value. A Receiver Node MUST NOT   |
   |                     | change the DRiP-Node-Counter field value as |
   |                     | it forward the HTTPS request to its peer    |
   |                     | nodes.                                      |
   +---------------------+---------------------------------------------+

   Example:
         DRiP-Node-Counter: 123

   +-------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
   |        Field Name       | Description                             |
   +-------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
   | DRiP-Node-Counter-reset | A node can reset the count (to zero) of |
   |                         | the number of times it initiates key-   |
   |                         | value data propagation. If the counter  |
   |                         | value is reset, prior to initiating     |
   |                         | data propagation, then this field value |
   |                         | MUST be set to true. Otherwise, it MUST |
   |                         | be set to false, at all times. A        |
   |                         | typical use case to reset the counter   |
   |                         | value is when the counter (of unsigned  |
   |                         | type) value wraps around. The Initiator |
   |                         | node MUST set this field value to       |
   |                         | either true or false. A Receiver Node   |
   |                         | MUST NOT change the DRiP-Node-Counter-  |
   |                         | reset field value as it forward the     |
   |                         | HTTPS request to its peer nodes.        |
   +-------------------------+-----------------------------------------+

   Example:
         DRiP-Node-Counter-reset: false












Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


   +-------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
   |        Field Name       | Description                             |
   +-------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
   |  DRiP-Transaction-Type  | The Initiator node MUST set this field  |
   |                         | value to be either "update" or "sync".  |
   |                         | A Receiver Node MUST NOT change the     |
   |                         | DRiP-Transaction-Type field value as it |
   |                         | forward the HTTPS request to its peer   |
   |                         | nodes.                                  |
   +-------------------------+-----------------------------------------+

   Example:
         DRiP-Transaction-Type: update

   +-----------------------+-------------------------------------------+
   |       Field Name      | Description                               |
   +-----------------------+-------------------------------------------+
   |   DRiP-Sync-Complete  | For sync transaction type, the Initiator  |
   |                       | node MUST set this field value to be      |
   |                       | true, if synchronization is complete.     |
   |                       | Otherwise, this field value MUST be set   |
   |                       | to false.                                 |
   +-----------------------+-------------------------------------------+

   Example:
         DRiP-Sync-Complete: false

5.4.  Key-Value Data Propagation Rules

   A node propagates key-value data to all its peer nodes except the the
   node from which it received data.  For example, in Figure 1, when
   node B receives key-value data from node A, it will propagate the
   data received to nodes C and D but not back to node A.

   For each transaction type (Update or Sync), the following set of
   actions MUST take place when a node receives a HTTPS request with
   propagated key-value data:

   o  If DRiP-Node-ID field value (in the HTTP header) contains
      Initiator node ID that has never been seen, both DRiP-Node-ID and
      DRiP-Node-Counter field values MUST be stored for future reference
      and the key-value data is propagated to all peer nodes.

   o  If DRiP-Node-ID field value (in the HTTP header) matches with a
      stored node ID and DRiP-Node-Counter-reset field value is false.

      *  The received key-value data MUST be propagated to the peer
         nodes if DRiP-Node-Counter field value is greater than the



Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


         saved counter value.  The DRiP-Node-Counter field value MUST be
         saved as the new counter for the stored node ID.

      *  If DRiP-Node-Counter field value is less than or equal to saved
         counter value, then the key-value data has already been
         received and MUST NOT be propagated to peer nodes.  This
         ensures that propagation stops when all nodes have received the
         key-value data from the Initiator node.

   o  If DRiP-Node-ID field value matches with a stored node ID and
      DRiP-Node-Counter-reset field value is true:

      *  The received key-value data MUST be propagated to the peer
         nodes.  The DRiP-Node-Counter field value MUST be saved as the
         new counter for the stored node ID.

5.5.  Key-Value Data Update

   When an Initiator node has new data it wants to propagate to the
   distributed mesh, it initiates an Update.  The Update consists of a
   two-phase commit (2PC) procedure in order to guarantee there are no
   race conditions for updating the same key's data, as well as for any
   error conditions in the distributed mesh that would cause the update
   to not complete for all nodes in the network.

   The two phases are called the "voting" phase and the "commit" phase.

























Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


                               _________
      ----------------------->|         |
     |                        | Waiting |
     |                        | For     |
     |   ---------------------| Events  |
     |  | (Update,            |_________|
     |  |  Start Timer)
     |  |                            --------------------------------
     |  |                           | Received Update From Peer Node |
     |  |                           |                                |
     |  |             ______________|_  If key matches an            |
     |  |            |                |  in-progress update          |
     |   ----------->|                |  vote "no".                  |
     |               | Waiting For    |  Otherwise, vote "yes".      |
     |               | Response From  |                              |
     |               | Peer Nodes     |<-----------------------------
     |               |                |
     |           ----|                |----
     |  Timer   |    |________________|    |
     |  Expired |                          | Received Votes
     |          |                          | From All Peer
     |          |                          | Nodes
     |          |      _______________     |
     |          |    |                |    |
     |          |    |                |    |
     |           --->|                |<---
     |               |  Validating    |
     | (If all Votes |  Votes         |
     |  are "YES",   |                |
     | propagate     |                |
     | commit)       |                |
      ---------------|________________|

                         Update State Diagram

5.5.1.  Voting Phase

   The voting phase is the phase where all nodes are queried to "vote"
   whether they are aware of any potential conflict that would cause the
   transaction not to complete.

   The Initiator node MUST set a timeout period to get response from its
   peer nodes.

   The peer nodes known to the initiator node will continue propagate
   the information to their peer nodes and so on.  However, these peer
   nodes beyond the initiator node will no longer need to keep track of
   the time interval for responses.  A node will stop continuing to



Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018               [Page 10]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


   propagate information when it determines it has received the same
   information again.  This can be determined by keeping track of the
   counter and originating node id.

   If all peer nodes vote "yes", then the second phase or commit phase
   in the local node is initiated.  If any node in the distributed mesh
   votes "no" or if the timeout period expires and all peer nodes have
   not responded, then the commit of the information MUST NOT be
   completed.  No action is taken for responses received after the
   timeout period.

   Note: The voting procedure is intentionally split into two separate
   full HTTP transactions for reliability.

    ___           ___      ___           ___      ___           ___
   |DB |_________|DB |    |DB |_________|DB |    |DB |_________|DB |
   |___|         |___|    |___|         |___|    |___|         |___|
     |   Data      |        |   Data      |        |   Data      |
     |   Store     |        |   Store     |        |   Store     |
    _|_  Cluster  _|_      _|_  Cluster  _|_      _|_  Cluster  _|_
   |DB |_________|DB |    |DB |_________|DB |    |DB |_________|DB |
   |___|         |___|    |___|         |___|    |___|         |___|
      \                     \                      |
       \                     \                     |
       _\___    Vote(HTTPS)  _\___    Vote(HTTPS)  |____
      |Node |  <----------  |Node |  ---------->  |Node |
      |  B  |---------------|  A  |---------------|  C  |
      |_____|  ---------->  |_____|  <----------  |_____|
                 Yes/No                Yes/No

                              Voting Phase

5.5.1.1.  API - POST /voting


















Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018               [Page 11]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


   Request:

   POST /voting

   Description:

   A post from either Initiator node or subsequent peer nodes to request
   a vote of "yes" or "no" whether the key-value data could be committed
   without error or conflict.

   Example (using cURL)

   Request

   $ curl -i -H "Content-Type: application/json" -H "DRiP-Node-ID:
       nodeA" -H "DRiP-Node-Counter: 1234" -H
       "DRiP-Node-Counter-reset: false" -X POST -d '{<key-value
       data>}' https://nodebregistry.com/voting

   Response

     HTTP/1.1 200 OK

5.5.1.2.  POST /votingphase/node/:nodeid/response/:response

   Request:

   POST /voting/peernode/:nodeid/response/:response

   Description:

   A POST from peer node back to node with response of vote.

   Example (using cURL)

   Request

   $ curl -i -X POST http://nodearegistry.com/node/nodeA/response/yes

   Response

     HTTP/1.1 200 OK

5.5.2.  Commit Phase

   The Initiator node, that originated the gossip, upon receiving a
   successful aggregated "yes" vote from all the peer nodes should start
   the commit phase.  This node MUST commit the data to its data store.



Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018               [Page 12]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


   Subsequently, this information is propagated to all the nodes so that
   each node in the mesh will commit the same information in their
   respective data stores.

    ___           ___                         ___           ___
   |DB |_________|DB |                       |DB |_________|DB |
   |___|         |___|                       |___|         |___|
     |   Data      |                           |   Data      |
     |   Store     |                           |   Store     |
    _|_  Cluster  _|_                         _|_  Cluster  _|_
   |DB |_________|DB |                       |DB |_________|DB |
   |___|         |___|                       |___|         |___|
                    \                       /
                     \COMMIT               /COMMIT
                     _\___     COMMIT   _ /__
                    |Node |------------|Node |
                    |  A  |    HTTPS   |  C  |
                    |_____|            |_____|
                        \H           H/
                         \T         T/
                    COMMIT\T       P/COMMIT
                           \P     P/
                            \S   S/
                           __\__ /  COMMIT    _____
                          |Node |------------|Node |
                          |  B  |   HTTPS    |  D  |
                          |_____|            |_____|
                         /                   /
                        /COMMIT             /COMMIT
      ___           ___/                  _/__          ___
     |DB |_________|DB |                 |DB |_________|DB |
     |___|         |___|                 |___|         |___|
       |   Data      |                     |   Data      |
       |   Store     |                     |   Store     |
      _|_  Cluster  _|_                   _|_  Cluster  _|_
     |DB |_________|DB |                 |DB |_________|DB |
     |___|         |___|                 |___|         |___|


                           Commit Phase

5.5.2.1.  API - POST /commit









Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018               [Page 13]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


   Request:

    POST /commit

   Description:

    A commit message is sent from Initiator or subsequent peer nodes to
    signal the Receiver node to commit the data to its data store.

    Example (using cURL)

    Request

     $ curl -i -H "Content-Type: application/json" -H "DRiP-Node-ID:
       nodeA" -H "DRiP-Node-Counter: 1234" -H
       "DRiP-Node-Counter-reset: false" -X POST -d
       '<key-value data>' https://nodebregistry.com/commit

    Response

     HTTP/1.1 200 OK


5.6.  Node Sync Operation

   A node, either newly added to the distributed mesh or put back into
   service after being inactive, will get the state of a peer node to
   determine if it is in "active" state.  If so, the node can
   immediately initiate a Sync transaction.  The peer node MUST start
   propagating a comprehensive and complete set of key-value data from
   its data store.

   The two phase commit does NOT apply here as the contents of the
   initiating node's data store is either outdated or empty.  During
   this phase (HTTPS requests received will have DRiP-Sync-Complete
   field value set to false), this node SHOULD NOT become an Initiator
   node to provision data.  While this transaction is going on, this
   node MUST vote "yes" to all real-time updates.  The commits
   corresponding to the Updates should also be completed and reflected
   in the data store.

5.6.1.  API - PUT /sync/node/:nodeid









Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018               [Page 14]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


   Request:

   PUT /sync/node/:nodeid

   Description:

   API call for initiating a full registry synchronization from node to
   peer-node.

   Example (using cURL)

   Request

    $ curl -i  -H "DRiP-Node-ID: nodeA" -H "Authorization: eyJ0e..."
        -X POST https://peernode.com/sync/node/nodeA

   Response

   HTTP/1.1 200 OK

5.7.  Heartbeat

   Periodic heartbeats are required for a node to determine it's
   visibility to the rest of it's peer nodes and whether it should put
   itself in "inactive" mode.  The procedure for heartbeats is as
   follows.

   A node sends periodic heartbeat requests to its peer nodes with an
   indication of its state.  These heartbeat requests are not to be
   propagated beyond the peer nodes.

   If all of its peer nodes cannot be reached or do not respond with
   200OK, then the node that sent the heartbeat request will set its own
   state to "inactive".  This is based on the reasonable assumption that
   none of the peer nodes are able to communicate with this node until a
   new heartbeat request is successful.  Once in the inactive state, the
   node will

   o  not propagate any incoming key-value data

   o  not update any incoming key-value data

   o  continue to send the periodic heartbeat requests to its peer
      nodes.  If any one responds with 200 OK, then the node will move
      its state to "synchronizing" and will re-synchronize its data with
      any active peer node as detailed in section 4.6





Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018               [Page 15]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


   In addition, any one or more peer nodes that cannot be reached or did
   not respond with 200 OK should not be used to propagate key-value
   data until it responds (with 200 OK) to the heartbeat request.

5.7.1.  API - POST /heartbeat/node/:nodeid

   Example (using cURL)

   Request

    $ curl -i  -H "DRiP-Node-ID: nodeA" -H "Authorization: eyJ0e..."
        -X POST -d '<state>' https://peernode.com/heartbeat/node/nodeA

   Response

   HTTP/1.1 200 OK

5.8.  Key-Value Data Update Entitlement Verification

   When a node owner would like to create or modify particular key-value
   data, generally in the context of a registry, there MAY be a
   verification procedure that key-value data write or modification can
   be performed.  This could include validating whether key-value data
   is entitled to be written, modified or subsequently propagated based
   on application policy.  For example, identity or telephone number
   ownership or porting.  The exact mechanics of this are out of scope
   of this document and are generally application specific.

6.  Security Considerations

6.1.  HTTPS

   All nodes MUST perform HTTP transactions using TLS as defined in
   [RFC7230].

6.2.  Authorization

   All nodes MUST validate their authority to consume the HTTP APIs of a
   peer node by adding a JSON Web Token (JWT) value [RFC7519] in the
   Authorization request-header field.

   The creation and verification of the JWT should be based on a digital
   signature.  For most distributed registry scenarios where the owner
   of a node may not have a direct relationship with another node owner,
   a PKI based certificate approach is highly suggested.  For protection
   against replay attacks, the claim set SHOULD contain an "iat" claim
   and the signature should be verified to be signed by the expected
   owner of the peer node.  The "iat" claim identifies the time at which



Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018               [Page 16]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


   the JWT was issued and can be used to validate when the time of the
   transaction occurred.

6.3.  Payload Validation

   In addition to the DRiP level protocol protection, it is highly
   suggested to sign and validate part or all of the JSON update
   payloads to the originator of the update.  DRiP does not define
   anything regarding the contents of the payload, so this document does
   not address this in any way.

7.  IANA Considerations

   None

8.  Acknowledgements

   We would like to thank you for your interest in this work.

9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [RFC7230]  Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer
              Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing",
              RFC 7230, DOI 10.17487/RFC7230, June 2014,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7230>.

   [RFC7519]  Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web Token
              (JWT)", RFC 7519, DOI 10.17487/RFC7519, May 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7519>.

9.2.  Informative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

Authors' Addresses

   Chris Wendt
   Comcast
   One Comcast Center
   Philadelphia, PA  19103
   USA

   Email: chris-ietf@chriswendt.net



Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018               [Page 17]


Internet-Draft                    DRiP                         July 2017


   Harsha Bellur
   Comcast
   One Comcast Center
   Philadelphia, PA  19103
   USA

   Email: Harsha_Bellur@cable.comcast.com












































Wendt & Bellur           Expires January 4, 2018               [Page 18]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.122, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/