draft-ietf-dime-diameter-cmd-iana-00.txt   draft-ietf-dime-diameter-cmd-iana-01.txt 
dime D. Romascanu dime D. Romascanu
Internet-Draft Avaya Internet-Draft Avaya
Updates: rfc3588 H. Tschofenig Updates: rfc3588 H. Tschofenig
(if approved) Nokia Siemens Networks (if approved) Nokia Siemens Networks
Intended status: Standards Track June 3, 2009 Intended status: Standards Track July 13, 2009
Expires: December 5, 2009 Expires: January 14, 2010
Updated IANA Considerations for Diameter Command Code Allocations Updated IANA Considerations for Diameter Command Code Allocations
draft-ietf-dime-diameter-cmd-iana-00.txt draft-ietf-dime-diameter-cmd-iana-01.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. Drafts.
skipping to change at page 1, line 34 skipping to change at page 1, line 34
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 5, 2009. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 14, 2010.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
skipping to change at page 4, line 10 skipping to change at page 4, line 10
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The Diameter Base specification, described in RFC 3588 [RFC3588], The Diameter Base specification, described in RFC 3588 [RFC3588],
provides a number of ways to extend Diameter, with new Diameter provides a number of ways to extend Diameter, with new Diameter
commands, i.e. messages used by Diameter applications, and commands, i.e. messages used by Diameter applications, and
applications as the most extensive enhancements. RFC 3588 applications as the most extensive enhancements. RFC3588 illustrates
illustrates the conditions that lead to the need to define a new the conditions, which require the definition of a new Diameter
Diameter application or a new command code. Depending on the scope application or a new command. Depending on the scope of the Diameter
of the Diameter extension IETF actions are necessary. Although extension IETF actions are necessary. Although defining new Diameter
defining new Diameter applications does not require IETF consensus, applications does not require IETF consensus, defining new Diameter
defining new Diameter commands requires IETF consensus per RFC 3588. commands requires IETF consensus per RFC 3588. This has lead to
This has lead to questionable design decisions by other Standards questionable design decisions by other Standards Development
Development Organizations which chose to define new applications on Organizations which chose to define new applications on existing
existing commands rather than asking for assignment of new command commands rather than asking for assignment of new command codes for
codes for the pure purpose of avoiding bringing their specifications the pure purpose of avoiding bringing their specifications to the
to the IETF. In some cases interoperability problems were causes as IETF. In some cases interoperability problems were causes as an
an effect of the poor design caused by overloading existing commands. effect of the poor design caused by overloading existing commands.
This document aligns the extensibility rules of Diameter application This document aligns the extensibility rules for Diameter command
with the Diameter commands offering ways to delegate work on Diameter codes with those defined for Diameter application identifiers and
to other SDOs to extend Diameter in a way that does not lead to poor offers a consistent way to delegate work on Diameter to other SDOs to
design choices. extend Diameter in a way that does not lead to poor design choices.
This is achieved by splitting the command code space into an IANA This is achieved by splitting the command code space into ranges and
administered code space, and a vendors-specific code space with providing different allocation policies to them: the first range is
different rules of allocation as per [RFC5226]. reserved for RADIUS backward compatibility, allocation of a command
code in the second number range requires IETF review, the third range
is utilized by vendor-specific command codes, and finally the last
range is for experimental commands. Section 4 provides more details
about the command code number ranges and the different allocation
policies are described in [RFC5226].
A revision of RFC 3588 is currently in development in the IETF DIME A revision of RFC 3588 is currently in development in the IETF DIME
WG [I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis]. and when approved will obsolete RFC WG [I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis] and when approved will obsolete RFC
3588 as well as this document. This document has as a goal providing 3588 as well as this document. This document has as a goal providing
in advance the change in the command codes allocation policy, so that in advance the change in the command codes allocation policy, so that
interoperability problems as the ones described above are avoided as interoperability problems as the ones described above are avoided as
soon as possible. soon as possible.
2. Conventions used in this document 2. Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
skipping to change at page 9, line 5 skipping to change at page 8, line 14
5. Acknowledgements 5. Acknowledgements
The content of this document is the result of the work in the IETF The content of this document is the result of the work in the IETF
Diameter Maintenance and Extensions (dime) working group. We would Diameter Maintenance and Extensions (dime) working group. We would
therefore like to thank all the working group members who were therefore like to thank all the working group members who were
involved in that discussion. While it appears to be a fairly small involved in that discussion. While it appears to be a fairly small
change in the allocation policy the effect on implementations is change in the allocation policy the effect on implementations is
rather dramatic. rather dramatic.
We would like to thank Mark Jones for his review comments.
6. References 6. References
6.1. Normative References 6.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3588] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J. [RFC3588] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J.
Arkko, "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, September 2003. Arkko, "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, September 2003.
skipping to change at page 9, line 26 skipping to change at page 9, line 26
Considered Useful", BCP 82, RFC 3692, January 2004. Considered Useful", BCP 82, RFC 3692, January 2004.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008. May 2008.
6.2. Informative References 6.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis] [I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis]
Fajardo, V., Arkko, J., Loughney, J., and G. Zorn, Fajardo, V., Arkko, J., Loughney, J., and G. Zorn,
"Diameter Base Protocol", draft-ietf-dime-rfc3588bis-17 "Diameter Base Protocol", draft-ietf-dime-rfc3588bis-18
(work in progress), May 2009. (work in progress), July 2009.
[RADTYPE] "IANA, RADIUS Types, [RADTYPE] "IANA, RADIUS Types,
http://www.iana.org/assignments/radius-types". http://www.iana.org/assignments/radius-types".
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Dan Romascanu Dan Romascanu
Avaya Avaya
Industrial Park Atidim, Bldg#3 Industrial Park Atidim, Bldg#3
Tel Aviv 61581 Tel Aviv 61581
 End of changes. 9 change blocks. 
26 lines changed or deleted 33 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.35. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/