draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow-05.txt   draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow-06.txt 
Network Working Group G. Lozano Network Working Group G. Lozano
Internet-Draft ICANN Internet-Draft ICANN
Intended status: Standards Track Feb 28, 2020 Intended status: Standards Track Apr 06, 2020
Expires: August 31, 2020 Expires: October 8, 2020
Registry Data Escrow Specification Registry Data Escrow Specification
draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow-05 draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow-06
Abstract Abstract
This document specifies the format and contents of data escrow This document specifies the format and contents of data escrow
deposits targeted primarily for domain name registries. However, the deposits targeted primarily for domain name registries. However, the
specification was designed to be independent of the underlying specification was designed to be independent of the underlying
objects that are being escrowed, therefore it could be used for objects that are being escrowed, therefore it could be used for
purposes other than domain name registries. purposes other than domain name registries.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
skipping to change at page 1, line 34 skipping to change at page 1, line 34
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 31, 2020. This Internet-Draft will expire on October 8, 2020.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2020 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 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 41 skipping to change at page 2, line 41
13.8. Changes from 07 to 08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 13.8. Changes from 07 to 08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
13.9. Changes from 08 to 09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 13.9. Changes from 08 to 09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
13.10. Changes from 09 to 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 13.10. Changes from 09 to 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
13.11. Changes from 10 to 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 13.11. Changes from 10 to 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
13.12. Changes from 11 to REGEXT 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 13.12. Changes from 11 to REGEXT 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
13.13. Changes from version REGEXT 00 to REGEXT 01 . . . . . . 16 13.13. Changes from version REGEXT 00 to REGEXT 01 . . . . . . 16
13.14. Changes from version REGEXT 01 to REGEXT 02 . . . . . . 16 13.14. Changes from version REGEXT 01 to REGEXT 02 . . . . . . 16
13.15. Changes from version REGEXT 02 to REGEXT 03 . . . . . . 16 13.15. Changes from version REGEXT 02 to REGEXT 03 . . . . . . 16
13.16. Changes from version REGEXT 03 to REGEXT 04 . . . . . . 16 13.16. Changes from version REGEXT 03 to REGEXT 04 . . . . . . 16
13.17. Changes from version REGEXT 04 to REGEXT 05 . . . . . . 17 13.17. Changes from version REGEXT 04 to REGEXT 05 . . . . . . 17
13.18. Changes from version REGEXT 05 to REGEXT 06 . . . . . . 17
14. Example of a Full Deposit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 14. Example of a Full Deposit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
15. Example of a Differential Deposit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 15. Example of a Differential Deposit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
16. Example of a Incremental Deposit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 16. Example of a Incremental Deposit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
17. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 17. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
17.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 17.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
17.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 17.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Registry Data Escrow is the process by which a registry periodically Registry Data Escrow is the process by which a registry periodically
submits data deposits to a third-party called an escrow agent. These submits data deposits to a third-party called an escrow agent. These
deposits comprise the minimum data needed by a third-party to resume deposits comprise the minimum data needed by a third-party to resume
operations if the registry cannot function and is unable or unwilling operations if the registry cannot function and is unable or unwilling
to facilitate an orderly transfer of service. For example, for a to facilitate an orderly transfer of service. For example, for a
domain name registry or registrar, the data to be deposited would domain name registry or registrar, the data to be deposited would
include all the objects related to registered domain names, e.g., include all the objects related to registered domain names, e.g.,
skipping to change at page 7, line 24 skipping to change at page 7, line 24
to the Timeline Watermark of the deposit. to the Timeline Watermark of the deposit.
5.1.2. Child <rdeMenu> element 5.1.2. Child <rdeMenu> element
This element contains auxiliary information of the data escrow This element contains auxiliary information of the data escrow
deposit. deposit.
A REQUIRED <rdeMenu> element contains the following child elements: A REQUIRED <rdeMenu> element contains the following child elements:
o A REQUIRED <version> element that identifies the RDE protocol o A REQUIRED <version> element that identifies the RDE protocol
version. version, this value MUST be 1.0.
o One or more <objURI> elements that contain namespace URIs o One or more <objURI> elements that contain namespace URIs
representing the <contents> and <deletes> element objects. representing the <contents> and <deletes> element objects.
5.1.3. Child <deletes> element 5.1.3. Child <deletes> element
This element SHOULD be present in deposits of type Incremental or This element SHOULD be present in deposits of type Incremental or
Differential. It contains the list of objects that were deleted Differential. It contains the list of objects that were deleted
since the base previous deposit. Each object in this section SHALL since the base previous deposit. Each object in this section SHALL
contain an ID for the object deleted. contain an ID for the object deleted.
skipping to change at page 12, line 35 skipping to change at page 12, line 35
10. Security Considerations 10. Security Considerations
This specification does not define the security mechanisms to be used This specification does not define the security mechanisms to be used
in the transmission of the data escrow deposits, since it only in the transmission of the data escrow deposits, since it only
specifies the minimum necessary to enable the rebuilding of a specifies the minimum necessary to enable the rebuilding of a
registry from deposits without intervention from the original registry from deposits without intervention from the original
registry. registry.
Depending on local policies, some elements or, most likely, the whole Depending on local policies, some elements or, most likely, the whole
deposit will be considered confidential. As such, the registry deposit will be considered confidential. As such, the registry
transmitting the data to the escrow agent should take all the transmitting the data to the escrow agent SHOULD take all the
necessary precautions such as encrypting the data itself and/or the necessary precautions such as encrypting the data itself and/or the
transport channel to avoid inadvertent disclosure of private data. transport channel to avoid inadvertent disclosure of private data.
Authentication of the parties passing data escrow deposit files is Authentication of the parties passing data escrow deposit files is
also of the utmost importance. The escrow agent SHOULD properly also of the utmost importance. The escrow agent SHOULD properly
authenticate the identity of the registry before accepting data authenticate the identity of the registry before accepting data
escrow deposits. In a similar manner, the registry SHOULD escrow deposits. In a similar manner, the registry SHOULD
authenticate the identity of the escrow agent before submitting any authenticate the identity of the escrow agent before submitting any
data. data.
skipping to change at page 17, line 18 skipping to change at page 17, line 18
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/ https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/
UNo6YxapgjyerAYv0223zEuzjFk UNo6YxapgjyerAYv0223zEuzjFk
2. The examples of deposits were moved to their own sections. 2. The examples of deposits were moved to their own sections.
3. <deposit> elements definition moved to section 5.1. 3. <deposit> elements definition moved to section 5.1.
4. The DIFF example was modified to make it more representative of a 4. The DIFF example was modified to make it more representative of a
differential deposit. differential deposit.
13.18. Changes from version REGEXT 05 to REGEXT 06
1. Normative references for XLM, XML Schema added.
2. Text added to define that version MUST be 1.0.
3. Normative SHOULD replaced should in the second paragraph in the
security section.
14. Example of a Full Deposit 14. Example of a Full Deposit
Example of a Full Deposit with the two example objects rdeObj1 and Example of a Full Deposit with the two example objects rdeObj1 and
rdeObj2: rdeObj2:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rde:deposit <rde:deposit
xmlns:rde="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:rde-1.0" xmlns:rde="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:rde-1.0"
xmlns:rdeObj1="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:rdeObj1-1.0" xmlns:rdeObj1="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:rdeObj1-1.0"
xmlns:rdeObj2="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:rdeObj2-1.0" xmlns:rdeObj2="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:rdeObj2-1.0"
skipping to change at page 20, line 9 skipping to change at page 21, line 9
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3339>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3339>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8499] Hoffman, P., Sullivan, A., and K. Fujiwara, "DNS [RFC8499] Hoffman, P., Sullivan, A., and K. Fujiwara, "DNS
Terminology", BCP 219, RFC 8499, DOI 10.17487/RFC8499, Terminology", BCP 219, RFC 8499, DOI 10.17487/RFC8499,
January 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8499>. January 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8499>.
[W3C.REC-xml-20081126]
Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C., Maler, E., and
F. Yergeau, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fifth
Edition) REC-xml-20081126", November 2008,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xml-20081126/>.
[W3C.REC-xmlschema-1-20041028]
Thompson, H., Beech, D., Maloney, M., and N. Mendelsohn,
"XML Schema Part 1: Structures Second Edition REC-
xmlschema-1-20041028", October 2004,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-1-20041028/>.
[W3C.REC-xmlschema-2-20041028]
Biron, P. and A. Malhotra, "XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes
Second Edition REC-xmlschema-2-20041028", October 2004,
<https://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-2-20041028/>.
17.2. Informative References 17.2. Informative References
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.
[RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running [RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running
Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205, Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205,
RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016, RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.
 End of changes. 9 change blocks. 
12 lines changed or deleted 39 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/