draft-ietf-weirds-bootstrap-10.txt   draft-ietf-weirds-bootstrap-11.txt 
Network Working Group M. Blanchet Network Working Group M. Blanchet
Internet-Draft Viagenie Internet-Draft Viagenie
Intended status: Standards Track October 27, 2014 Intended status: Standards Track December 18, 2014
Expires: April 30, 2015 Expires: June 21, 2015
Finding the Authoritative Registration Data (RDAP) Service Finding the Authoritative Registration Data (RDAP) Service
draft-ietf-weirds-bootstrap-10.txt draft-ietf-weirds-bootstrap-11.txt
Abstract Abstract
This document specifies a method to find which Registration Data This document specifies a method to find which Registration Data
Access Protocol (RDAP) server is authoritative to answer queries for Access Protocol (RDAP) server is authoritative to answer queries for
a requested scope, such as domain names, IP addresses or Autonomous a requested scope, such as domain names, IP addresses or Autonomous
System numbers. System numbers.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
skipping to change at page 1, line 33 skipping to change at page 1, line 33
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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://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 April 30, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on June 21, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2014 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://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
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Conventions Used In This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Conventions Used In This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Structure of RDAP Bootstrap Service Registries . . . . . . . 3 3. Structure of the RDAP Bootstrap Service Registries . . . . . 3
4. Domain Name RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Domain Name RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Internet Numbers RDAP Bootstrap Service Registries . . . . . 6 5. Internet Numbers RDAP Bootstrap Service Registries . . . . . 6
5.1. IPv4 Address Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry . . . 6 5.1. IPv4 Address Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry . . . 6
5.2. IPv6 Address Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry . . . 7 5.2. IPv6 Address Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry . . . 7
5.3. Autonomous Systems RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry . . . 8 5.3. Autonomous Systems RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry . . . 8
6. Entity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. Entity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7. Non-existent Entries or RDAP URL Values . . . . . . . . . . . 10 7. Non-existent Entries or RDAP URL Values . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8. Deployment and Implementation Considerations . . . . . . . . 10 8. Deployment and Implementation Considerations . . . . . . . . 10
9. Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 9. Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10. Formal Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 10. Formal Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10.1. Imported JSON Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 10.1. Imported JSON Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10.2. Registry Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 10.2. Registry Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12.1. IPv4 Address Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry . . . 13 12.1. IPv4 Address Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry . . . 14
12.2. IPv6 Address Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry . . . 14 12.2. IPv6 Address Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry . . . 14
12.3. Autonomous System Number Space RDAP Bootstrap Service 12.3. Autonomous System Number Space RDAP Bootstrap Service
Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
12.4. Domain Name Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry . . . 14 12.4. Domain Name Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry . . . 15
12.5. Additional Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 13. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
13. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
14.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 14.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
14.2. Non-Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 14.2. Non-Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Querying and retrieving registration data from registries are defined Querying and retrieving registration data from registries are defined
in the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap in the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap
-query][I-D.ietf-weirds-using-http][I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response]. -query][I-D.ietf-weirds-using-http][I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response].
These documents do not specify where to send the queries. This These documents do not specify where to send the queries. This
document specifies a method to find which server is authoritative to document specifies a method to find which server is authoritative to
answer queries for the requested scope. answer queries for the requested scope.
Top-level domains(TLD), Autonomous System numbers (AS), and network Top-level domains(TLD), Autonomous System numbers (AS), and network
blocks are delegated by IANA to Internet registries such as TLD blocks are delegated by IANA to Internet registries such as TLD
registries and Regional Internet Registries(RIR) that then issue registries and Regional Internet Registries (RIR) that then issue
further delegations and maintain information about them. Thus, further delegations and maintain information about them. Thus, the
obviously the bootstrap information needed by RDAP clients is best bootstrap information needed by RDAP clients is best generated from
generated from data and processes already maintained by IANA, whose data and processes already maintained by IANA, which registries
registries already exist at [ipv4reg], [ipv6reg], [asreg], and already exist at [ipv4reg], [ipv6reg], [asreg], and [domainreg].
[domainreg].
This document requests IANA to make an augmented version of This document requests IANA to create new registries based on a JSON
the existing registries available for the specific purpose of format specified in this document, herein named RDAP Bootstrap
RDAP use, herein named RDAP Bootstrap Service Registries. An RDAP Service Registries. These new registries are based on the existing
client fetches the RDAP Bootstrap Service Registries, extracts the entries of the above mentioned registries. An RDAP client fetches
data and then does a match with the query data to find the the RDAP Bootstrap Service Registries, extracts the data and then
authoritative registration data server and appropriate query base performs a match with the query data to find the authoritative
URL. registration data server and appropriate query base URL.
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].
3. Structure of RDAP Bootstrap Service Registries 3. Structure of the RDAP Bootstrap Service Registries
The RDAP Bootstrap Service Registries, as specified in Section 12, The RDAP Bootstrap Service Registries, as specified in Section 12
will be made available as JSON [RFC7159] objects, to be retrieved via below, will be made available as JSON [RFC7159] objects, to be
HTTP from a location as specified by IANA. The JSON object for each retrieved via HTTP from a location specified by IANA. The JSON
registry will start with a series of members that contain metadata object for each registry contains a series of members containing
about the registry such as a version identifier, a timestamp of the metadata about the registry such as a version identifier, a timestamp
publication date of the registry and a description. Following that of the publication date of the registry and a description.
is a "services" member which contains the registry items themselves, Additionally, a "services" member contains the registry items
as an array. Each item of the array contains a second-level array, themselves, as an array. Each item of the array contains a second-
with two elements, each of them being a third-level array. level array, with two elements, each of them being a third-level
array.
The first third-level array, named 'Entry array', contains all Each element of the Services array is a second-level array with two
entries that have the same set of base RDAP URLs. The second third- elements: in order, an Entry Array and a Service URL Array.
level array, named 'Service URL array', contains the list of base
RDAP URLs usable for the entries found in the 'Entry array'. There The Entry Array contains all entries that have the same set of base
is no assumption of sorting except that the two arrays found in each RDAP URLs. The Service URL Array contains the list of base RDAP URLs
second-level array MUST appear in the correct order: The entries usable for the entries found in the Entry Array. Elements within
array are followed by the service URL array. An example structure of these two arrays are not sorted in any way.
the JSON output of a RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry is illustrated:
An example structure of the JSON output of a RDAP Bootstrap Service
Registry is illustrated:
{ {
"version": "1.0", "version": "1.0",
"publication": "YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ", "publication": "YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ",
"description": "Some text", "description": "Some text",
"services": [ "services": [
[ [
["entry1", "entry2", "entry3"], ["entry1", "entry2", "entry3"],
[ [
"https://registry.example.com/myrdap/", "https://registry.example.com/myrdap/",
skipping to change at page 4, line 29 skipping to change at page 4, line 29
[ [
"http://example.org/" "http://example.org/"
] ]
] ]
] ]
} }
The formal syntax is described in Section 10. The formal syntax is described in Section 10.
The "version" corresponds to the format version of the registry. The "version" corresponds to the format version of the registry.
This specification defines "1.0". This specification defines version "1.0".
The syntax of "publication" value conforms to the Internet date/time The syntax of "publication" value conforms to the Internet date/time
format [RFC3339]. format [RFC3339]. The value is the latest update date of the
registry by IANA.
The optional "description" string can contain a comment regarding the The optional "description" string can contain a comment regarding the
content of the bootstrap object. content of the bootstrap object.
Per [RFC7258], in each array of base RDAP URLs, the secure versions Per [RFC7258], in each array of base RDAP URLs, the secure versions
of the transport protocol SHOULD be preferred and tried first. For of the transport protocol SHOULD be preferred and tried first. For
example, if the base RDAP URLs array contain both https and http example, if the base RDAP URLs array contain both https and http
URLs, the bootstrap client SHOULD try the https version first. URLs, the bootstrap client SHOULD try the https version first.
Base RDAP URLs MUST have a trailing "/" character because they are Base RDAP URLs MUST have a trailing "/" character because they are
concatenated to the various segments defined in concatenated to the various segments defined in
[I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query]. [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query].
JSON names MUST follow the format recommendations of JSON names MUST follow the format recommendations of
[I-D.ietf-weirds-using-http]. Any unknown or unspecified JSON object [I-D.ietf-weirds-using-http]. Any unrecognized JSON object
properties or values should be ignored by implementers. properties or values MUST be ignored by implementations.
Internationalized Domain Names labels used as entries or base RDAP Internationalized Domain Names labels used as entries or base RDAP
URLs in the registries defined in this document MUST be only URLs in the registries defined in this document MUST be only
represented using their A-Label form as defined in [RFC5890]. represented using their A-Label form as defined in [RFC5890].
All Domain Names labels used as entries or base RDAP URLs in the All Domain Names labels used as entries or base RDAP URLs in the
registries defined in this document MUST be only represented in registries defined in this document MUST be only represented in
lowercase. lowercase.
4. Domain Name RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry 4. Domain Name RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry
skipping to change at page 5, line 48 skipping to change at page 5, line 48
[ [
"https://example.net/rdapxn--zckzah/", "https://example.net/rdapxn--zckzah/",
"http://example.net/rdapxn--zckzah/" "http://example.net/rdapxn--zckzah/"
] ]
] ]
] ]
} }
The domain names authoritative registration data service is found by The domain names authoritative registration data service is found by
doing the label-wise longest match of the target domain name with the doing the label-wise longest match of the target domain name with the
domain values in the arrays in the IANA Domain Name RDAP Bootstrap domain values in the Entry Arrays in the IANA Domain Name RDAP
Service Registry. The values contained in the second element of the Bootstrap Service Registry. The match is done per label, from right
array are the valid base RDAP URLs as described in to left. If the longest match results in multiple entries, then
[I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query]. those entries are considered equivalent. The values contained in the
Service URL Array of the matching second-level array are the valid
base RDAP URLs as described in [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query].
For example, a domain RDAP query for a.b.example.com matches the com For example, a domain RDAP query for a.b.example.com matches the com
entry in one of the arrays of the registry. The base RDAP URL for entry in one of the arrays of the registry. The base RDAP URL for
this query is then taken from the second element of the array, which this query is then taken from the second element of the array, which
is an array of base RDAP URLs valid for this entry. The client is an array of base RDAP URLs valid for this entry. The client
chooses one of the base URLs from this array; in this example it chooses one of the base URLs from this array; in this example it
chooses the only one available, "https://registry.example.com/ chooses the only one available, "https://registry.example.com/
myrdap/". The segment specified in [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query] is myrdap/". The segment specified in [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query] is
then appended to the base URL to complete the query. The complete then appended to the base URL to complete the query. The complete
query is then "https://registry.example.com/myrdap/domain/ query is then "https://registry.example.com/myrdap/domain/
a.b.example.com". a.b.example.com".
If a domain RDAP query for a.b.example.com matches both com and If a domain RDAP query for a.b.example.com matches both com and
example.com entries in the registry, then the longest match applies example.com entries in the registry, then the longest match applies
and the example.com entry is used by the client. and the example.com entry is used by the client.
If the registry contains entries such as com and goodexample.com,
then a domain RDAP query for example.com only match com entry,
because matching is done on a per label basis.
The entry for the root of the domain name space is specified as "".
5. Internet Numbers RDAP Bootstrap Service Registries 5. Internet Numbers RDAP Bootstrap Service Registries
This section discusses IPv4 and IPv6 address space and autonomous This section discusses IPv4 and IPv6 address space and autonomous
system numbers. system numbers.
For IP address space, the authoritative registration data service is For IP address space, the authoritative registration data service is
found by doing a longest match of the target address with the values found by doing a longest match of the target address with the values
of the arrays in the corresponding Address Space RDAP Bootstrap of the arrays in the corresponding Address Space RDAP Bootstrap
Service registry. The longest match is done the same way as for Service registry. The longest match is done the same way as for
routing: the addresses are converted in binary form and then the routing: the addresses are converted in binary form and then the
binary strings are compared to find the longest match up to the binary strings are compared to find the longest match up to the
specified prefix length. The values contained in the second element specified prefix length. The values contained in the second element
of the array are the base RDAP URLs as described in of the array are the base RDAP URLs as described in
[I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query]. The longest match method enables [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query]. The longest match method enables
covering prefixes of a larger address space pointing to one base RDAP covering prefixes of a larger address space pointing to one base RDAP
URL while more specific prefixes within the covering prefix being URL while more specific prefixes within the covering prefix are being
served by another base RDAP URL. served by another base RDAP URL.
5.1. IPv4 Address Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry 5.1. IPv4 Address Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry
The JSON output of this registry contains IPv4 prefix entries, The JSON output of this registry contains IPv4 prefix entries,
specified in CIDR format and grouped by RDAP URLs, as shown in this specified in CIDR format [RFC4632] and grouped by RDAP URLs, as shown
example. in this example.
{ {
"version": "1.0", "version": "1.0",
"publication": "2024-01-07T10:11:12Z", "publication": "2024-01-07T10:11:12Z",
"description": "RDAP Bootstrap file for example registries.", "description": "RDAP Bootstrap file for example registries.",
"services": [ "services": [
[ [
["1.0.0.0/8", "192.0.0.0/8"], ["1.0.0.0/8", "192.0.0.0/8"],
[ [
"https://rir1.example.com/myrdap/" "https://rir1.example.com/myrdap/"
skipping to change at page 8, line 42 skipping to change at page 8, line 42
For example, a query for "2001:0200:1000::/48" matches the For example, a query for "2001:0200:1000::/48" matches the
"2001:0200::/23" entry and the "2001:0200:1000::/36" entry in the "2001:0200::/23" entry and the "2001:0200:1000::/36" entry in the
example registry above. The latter is chosen by the client given the example registry above. The latter is chosen by the client given the
longest match. The base RDAP URL for this query is then taken from longest match. The base RDAP URL for this query is then taken from
the second element of the array, which is an array of base RDAP URLs the second element of the array, which is an array of base RDAP URLs
valid for this entry. The client chooses one of the base URLs from valid for this entry. The client chooses one of the base URLs from
this array; in this example it chooses "https://example.net/ this array; in this example it chooses "https://example.net/
rdaprir2/" because it's the secure version of the protocol. The rdaprir2/" because it's the secure version of the protocol. The
segment specified in [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query] is then appended to segment specified in [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query] is then appended to
the base URL to complete the query. The complete query is therefore the base URL to complete the query. The complete query is therefore
"https://example.net/rdaprir2/ip/2001:0200:1000::/48". If the server "https://example.net/rdaprir2/ip/2001:0200:1000::/48". If the target
does not answer, the client can then use another URL prefix from the RDAP server does not answer, the client can then use another URL
array. prefix from the array.
5.3. Autonomous Systems RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry 5.3. Autonomous Systems RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry
The JSON output of this contains Autonomous Systems Number Ranges The JSON output of this contains Autonomous Systems Number Ranges
entries, grouped by base RDAP URLs, as shown in this example. The entries, grouped by base RDAP URLs, as shown in this example. The
first element of each second-level array is an array containing the Entry Array is an array containing the list of AS number ranges
list of AS number ranges served by the base RDAP URLs found in the served by the base RDAP URLs found in the second element. The array
second element. The array always contains two AS numbers which always contains two AS numbers represented in decimal format which
represents the range of AS Numbers between the two elements of the represents the range of AS Numbers between the two elements of the
array. When the two AS numbers are identical, then it only refers to array. A single AS number is represented as a range of two identical
that single AS number. AS numbers.
{ {
"version": "1.0", "version": "1.0",
"publication": "2024-01-07T10:11:12Z", "publication": "2024-01-07T10:11:12Z",
"description": "RDAP Bootstrap file for example registries.", "description": "RDAP Bootstrap file for example registries.",
"services": [ "services": [
[ [
["2045-2045"], ["2045-2045"],
[ [
"https://rir3.example.com/myrdap/" "https://rir3.example.com/myrdap/"
skipping to change at page 9, line 48 skipping to change at page 9, line 48
RDAP URLs valid for this entry. The client chooses one of the base RDAP URLs valid for this entry. The client chooses one of the base
URLs from this array; in this example it chooses URLs from this array; in this example it chooses
"https://example.net/rdaprir2/". The segment specified in "https://example.net/rdaprir2/". The segment specified in
[I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query] is then appended to the base URL to [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query] is then appended to the base URL to
complete the query. The complete query is therefore complete the query. The complete query is therefore
"https://example.net/rdaprir2/autnum/65411". If the server does not "https://example.net/rdaprir2/autnum/65411". If the server does not
answer, the client can then use another URL prefix from the array. answer, the client can then use another URL prefix from the array.
6. Entity 6. Entity
Entities (such as contacts, registrants, or registrars) can Entities (such as contacts, registrants or registrars) can be queried
be queried by handle as described in [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query]. by handle as described in [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query]. Since there
Since there is no global namespace for entities, this document does is no global namespace for entities, this document does not describe
not describe how to find the authoritative RDAP server for entities. how to find the authoritative RDAP server for entities. It is
possible however that, if the entity identifier was received from a
It is possible however that, if the entity identifier was received previous query, the same RDAP server could be queried for that entity
from a previous query, the same RDAP server could be queried for that or the entity identifier itself is a fully referenced URL that can be
entity or the entity identifier itself is a fully referenced URL that queried.
can be queried.
7. Non-existent Entries or RDAP URL Values 7. Non-existent Entries or RDAP URL Values
The registries may not contain the requested value or the base RDAP The registries may not contain the requested value. In these cases,
URL value may be empty. In these cases, there is no known RDAP there is no known RDAP server for that requested value and the client
server for that requested value and the client SHOULD provide an SHOULD provide an appropriate error message to the user.
appropriate error message to the user.
8. Deployment and Implementation Considerations 8. Deployment and Implementation Considerations
This method relies on the fact that RDAP clients are fetching the This method relies on the fact that RDAP clients are fetching the
IANA registries to then find the servers locally. Clients SHOULD NOT IANA registries to then find the servers locally. Clients SHOULD NOT
fetch the registry on every RDAP request. Clients SHOULD cache the fetch the registry on every RDAP request. Clients SHOULD cache the
registry, but use underlying protocol signalling, such as the HTTP registry, but use underlying protocol signalling, such as the HTTP
Expires header field [RFC7234], to identify when it is time to Expires header field [RFC7234], to identify when it is time to
refresh the cached registry. refresh the cached registry.
skipping to change at page 12, line 13 skipping to change at page 12, line 11
[RFC7159] [RFC7159]
o STRING: a "string" as defined in Section 2.5 of [RFC7159] o STRING: a "string" as defined in Section 2.5 of [RFC7159]
10.2. Registry Syntax 10.2. Registry Syntax
Using the above terms for the JSON structures, the syntax of a Using the above terms for the JSON structures, the syntax of a
registry is defined as follows: registry is defined as follows:
o rdap-bootstrap-registry: an OBJECT containing a MEMBER version and o rdap-bootstrap-registry: an OBJECT containing a MEMBER version and
a MEMBER publication and a MEMBER description and a MEMBER a MEMBER publication and a optional MEMBER description and a
services-list MEMBER services-list
o version: a MEMBER with MEMBER-NAME "version" and MEMBER-VALUE a o version: a MEMBER with MEMBER-NAME "version" and MEMBER-VALUE a
STRING STRING
o publication: a MEMBER with MEMBER-NAME "publication" and MEMBER- o publication: a MEMBER with MEMBER-NAME "publication" and MEMBER-
VALUE a STRING VALUE a STRING
o description: a MEMBER with MEMBER-NAME "description" and MEMBER- o description: a MEMBER with MEMBER-NAME "description" and MEMBER-
VALUE a STRING VALUE a STRING
o services-list: a MEMBER with MEMBER-NAME "services" and MEMBER- o services-list: a MEMBER with MEMBER-NAME "services" and MEMBER-
VALUE a services-array VALUE a services-array
o services-array: an ARRAY, where each ARRAY-VALUE is a service o services-array: an ARRAY, where each ARRAY-VALUE is a service
o service: an ARRAY of 2 elements, where the first ARRAY-VALUE is a o service: an ARRAY of 2 elements, where the first ARRAY-VALUE is a
an entry-list and the second ARRAY-VALUE is a service-uri-list an entry-list and the second ARRAY-VALUE is a service-uri-list
o entry-list: an ARRAY, where each ARRAY-VALUE is a entry o entry-list: an ARRAY, where each ARRAY-VALUE is an entry
o entry: a STRING o entry: a STRING
o service-uri-list: an ARRAY, where each ARRAY-VALUE is a service- o service-uri-list: an ARRAY, where each ARRAY-VALUE is a service-
uri uri
o service-uri: a STRING o service-uri: a STRING
11. Security Considerations 11. Security Considerations
By providing a bootstrap method to find RDAP servers, this document By providing a bootstrap method to find RDAP servers, this document
helps to ensure that the end-users will get the RDAP data from an helps to ensure that the end-users will get the RDAP data from an
authoritative source, instead of from rogue sources. The method has authoritative source, instead of from rogue sources. The method has
the same security properties as the RDAP protocols themselves. The the same security properties as the RDAP protocols themselves. The
transport used to access the registries could be more secure by using transport used to access the registries could be more secure by using
TLS [RFC5246] if IANA supports it. TLS [RFC5246] if IANA supports it.
Additional considerations on using RDAP are described in
[I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-sec]
12. IANA Considerations 12. IANA Considerations
The required new functionality in support of RDAP could be IANA is requested to make the RDAP Bootstrap Services Registries,
accomplished by augmenting the existing registries to contain new created below, available as JSON objects. The contents of these
fields, or creating second parallel registries containing the extra registries are described in Section 3, Section 4 and Section 5, with
fields whose entries mirror the existing ones. Either approach will the formal syntax specified in Section 10.
satisfy the needs of this document.
IANA is requested to make the RDAP Bootstrap Services Registries The process for adding or updating entries in these registries
described below available as JSON objects, the syntax of which are differs from the normal IANA registry processes: these registries are
described by section 10. The process for adding or updating entries generated from the data, processes, and policies maintained by IANA
into these registries does not correspond to the registration in their allocation registries (([ipv4reg], [ipv6reg], [asreg], and
policies described in [RFC5226]; as stated earlier, these registries [domainreg])), with the addition of new RDAP server information.
are generated from the data, processes, and policies maintained by
IANA in their allocation registries ([ipv4reg], [ipv6reg], [asreg],
and [domainreg]). IANA is expected to generate the RDAP Bootstrap
Services Registries data from these above mentioned registries,
according to their own registration policies. This document does not
extend or otherwise change those policies.
Each of the RDAP Bootstrap Services Registries needs to be made IANA is expected to create and update RDAP Bootstrap Services
available for general public on-demand download in the JSON format at Registries entries from the allocation registries as those registries
a location determined by IANA. are updated.
IANA is also advised that the download demand for the RDAP Bootstrap This document does not change any policies related to the allocation
Services Registries may be unusually high compared to other registries, but IANA will need to provide a mechanism for collecting
registries that exist already. The technical infrastructure by which the RDAP server information. The RDAP Bootstrap Services Registries
registries are published may need to be reviewed. will start empty and will be gradually populated as registrants of
domains and address spaces provide RDAP server information to IANA.
Multiple entries pointing to the same set of URLs are grouped IANA is asked to create a new top-level category on the Protocol
together in an array. Since multiple entries of non contiguous space Registries page, http://www.iana.org/protocols . The group will be
may be grouped together, the registry may not be sortable by entries, called "Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Registries". Each
therefore it is not required or expected that the entries be sorted of the RDAP Bootstrap Services Registries needs to be made available
in a registry. for general public on-demand download in the JSON format, and that
registry's URI will be listed directly on the Protocol Registries
page, in addition to being linked from the registry's name. Those
entries in the new category might look like this:
------------------------------
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)
Bootstrap Service Registry RFC xxxx
for IPv4 Address Space http://iana URI for IPv4 bootstrap
Bootstrap Service Registry RFC xxxx
for IPv6 Address Space http://iana URI for IPv6 bootstrap
Bootstrap Service Registry RFC xxxx
for AS Number Space http://iana URI for ASN bootstrap
Bootstrap Service Registry RFC xxxx
for Domain Name Space http://iana URI for DN bootstrap
------------------------------
Other normal registries will be added to this group by other
documents, but it is important that the URIs for these registries be
clearly listed on the main page, to make those URIs obvious to
implementors -- these are registries that will be accessed by
software, as well as reference information for humans.
Because these registries will be accessed by software, the download
demand for the RDAP Bootstrap Services Registries may be unusually
high compared to normal IANA registries. The technical
infrastructure by which registries are published will need to be
reviewed, and might need to be augmented.
As discussed in Section Section 8, software that accesses these
registries will depend on the HTTP Expires header field to limit
their query rate. It is, therefore, important for that header field
to be properly set to provide timely information as the registries
change, while maintaining a reasonable load on the IANA servers.
The HTTP Content-Type returned to clients accessing these JSON-
formatted registries MUST be "application/json", as defined in
[RFC7159].
Because of how information in the RDAP Bootstrap Services Registries
is grouped and formatted, the registry entries may not be sortable.
It is therefore not required or expected that the entries be sorted
in any way.
12.1. IPv4 Address Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry 12.1. IPv4 Address Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry
Entries in this registry contain at least the following: Entries in this registry contain at least the following:
o a CIDR specification of the network block being registered o a CIDR [RFC4632] specification of the network block being
registered
o one or more URLs that provide the RDAP service regarding this o one or more URLs that provide the RDAP service regarding this
registration. registration.
12.2. IPv6 Address Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry 12.2. IPv6 Address Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry
Entries in this registry contain at least the following: Entries in this registry contain at least the following:
o an IPv6 prefix [RFC4291] specification of the network block being o an IPv6 prefix [RFC4291] specification of the network block being
registered registered
skipping to change at page 14, line 33 skipping to change at page 15, line 23
12.4. Domain Name Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry 12.4. Domain Name Space RDAP Bootstrap Service Registry
Entries in this registry contain at least the following: Entries in this registry contain at least the following:
o a domain name attached to the root being registered o a domain name attached to the root being registered
o one or more URLs that provide the RDAP service regarding this o one or more URLs that provide the RDAP service regarding this
registration. registration.
12.5. Additional Consideration
The HTTP Content-Type returned to clients accessing the JSON output
of the registries MUST be "application/json" as defined in [RFC7159].
13. Acknowledgements 13. Acknowledgements
The WEIRDS working group had multiple discussions on this topic, The WEIRDS working group had multiple discussions on this topic,
including a session during IETF 84, where various methods such as in- including a session during IETF 84, where various methods such as in-
DNS and others were debated. The idea of using IANA registries was DNS and others were debated. The idea of using IANA registries was
discovered by the editor during discussions with his colleagues as discovered by the editor during discussions with his colleagues as
well as by a comment from Andy Newton. All the people involved in well as by a comment from Andy Newton. All the people involved in
these discussions are herein acknowledged. Linlin Zhou, Jean- these discussions are herein acknowledged. Linlin Zhou, Jean-
Philippe Dionne, John Levine, Kim Davies, Ernie Dainow, Scott Philippe Dionne, John Levine, Kim Davies, Ernie Dainow, Scott
Hollenbeck, Arturo Servin, Andy Newton, Murray Kucherawy, Tom Hollenbeck, Arturo Servin, Andy Newton, Murray Kucherawy, Tom
Harrison, Naoki Kambe, Alexander Mayrhofer, Edward Lewis, Pete Harrison, Naoki Kambe, Alexander Mayrhofer, Edward Lewis, Pete
Resnick, Alessandro Vesely, Bert Greevenbosch have provided input and Resnick, Alessandro Vesely, Bert Greevenbosch, Barry Leiba, Jari
suggestions to this document. Guillaume Leclanche was a co-editor of Arkko, Kathleen Moriaty, Stephen Farrell, Richard Barnes, Jean-
this document for some revisions; his support is therein acknowledged Francois Tremblay have provided input and suggestions to this
and greatly appreciated. The section on formal definition was document. Guillaume Leclanche was a co-editor of this document for
inspired by section 6.2 of [RFC7071]. some revisions; his support is therein acknowledged and greatly
appreciated. The section on formal definition was inspired by
section 6.2 of [RFC7071].
14. References 14. References
14.1. Normative References 14.1. 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.
[RFC3339] Klyne, G., Ed. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the [RFC3339] Klyne, G., Ed. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the
Internet: Timestamps", RFC 3339, July 2002. Internet: Timestamps", RFC 3339, July 2002.
[RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing [RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006. Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006.
[RFC4632] Fuller, V. and T. Li, "Classless Inter-domain Routing
(CIDR): The Internet Address Assignment and Aggregation
Plan", BCP 122, RFC 4632, August 2006.
[RFC5890] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for [RFC5890] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for
Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework", Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework",
RFC 5890, August 2010. RFC 5890, August 2010.
[RFC7159] Bray, T., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data [RFC7159] Bray, T., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
Interchange Format", RFC 7159, March 2014. Interchange Format", RFC 7159, March 2014.
14.2. Non-Normative References 14.2. Non-Normative References
[I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response] [I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response]
Newton, A. and S. Hollenbeck, "JSON Responses for the Newton, A. and S. Hollenbeck, "JSON Responses for the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", draft-ietf- Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", draft-ietf-
weirds-json-response-10 (work in progress), October 2014. weirds-json-response-13 (work in progress), December 2014.
[I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query] [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-query]
Newton, A. and S. Hollenbeck, "Registration Data Access Newton, A. and S. Hollenbeck, "Registration Data Access
Protocol Query Format", draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-query-15 Protocol Query Format", draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-query-16
(work in progress), October 2014. (work in progress), October 2014.
[I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-sec]
Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the
Registration Data Access Protocol", draft-ietf-weirds-
rdap-sec-12 (work in progress), December 2014.
[I-D.ietf-weirds-redirects] [I-D.ietf-weirds-redirects]
Martinez, C., Zhou, L., and G. Rada, "Redirection Service Martinez, C., Zhou, L., and G. Rada, "Redirection Service
for Registration Data Access Protocol", draft-ietf-weirds- for Registration Data Access Protocol", draft-ietf-weirds-
redirects-04 (work in progress), July 2014. redirects-04 (work in progress), July 2014.
[I-D.ietf-weirds-using-http] [I-D.ietf-weirds-using-http]
Newton, A., Ellacott, B., and N. Kong, "HTTP usage in the Newton, A., Ellacott, B., and N. Kong, "HTTP usage in the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", draft-ietf- Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", draft-ietf-
weirds-using-http-13 (work in progress), October 2014. weirds-using-http-15 (work in progress), November 2014.
[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.
[RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security [RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security
(TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, August 2008. (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, August 2008.
[RFC7071] Borenstein, N. and M. Kucherawy, "A Media Type for [RFC7071] Borenstein, N. and M. Kucherawy, "A Media Type for
Reputation Interchange", RFC 7071, November 2013. Reputation Interchange", RFC 7071, November 2013.
 End of changes. 40 change blocks. 
120 lines changed or deleted 178 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/