draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-query-10.txt   draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-query-11.txt 
Network Working Group A. Newton Network Working Group A. Newton
Internet-Draft ARIN Internet-Draft ARIN
Intended status: Standards Track S. Hollenbeck Intended status: Standards Track S. Hollenbeck
Expires: August 8, 2014 Verisign Labs Expires: January 30, 2015 Verisign Labs
February 4, 2014 July 29, 2014
Registration Data Access Protocol Query Format Registration Data Access Protocol Query Format
draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-query-10 draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-query-11
Abstract Abstract
This document describes uniform patterns to construct HTTP URLs that This document describes uniform patterns to construct HTTP URLs that
may be used to retrieve registration information from registries may be used to retrieve registration information from registries
(including both Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) and Domain Name (including both Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) and Domain Name
Registries (DNRs)) using "RESTful" web access patterns. Registries (DNRs)) using "RESTful" web access patterns.
Normative Reference Note
Normative references to RFC 7231 and draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 can be
replaced with a reference to RFC 2616 if draft-ietf-httpbis-http2 is
still a work in progress when this document is ready for publication.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted 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). 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 August 8, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 30, 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 11 skipping to change at page 2, line 17
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. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Acronyms and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Acronyms and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Lookup Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1. Lookup Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1.1. IP Network Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . 5 3.1.1. IP Network Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . 5
3.1.2. Autonomous System Path Segment Specification . . . . 5 3.1.2. Autonomous System Path Segment Specification . . . . 6
3.1.3. Domain Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1.3. Domain Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1.4. Name Server Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . 7 3.1.4. Name Server Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . 7
3.1.5. Entity Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.1.5. Entity Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1.6. Help Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.1.6. Help Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2. Search Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.2. Search Path Segment Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2.1. Domain Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.2.1. Domain Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2.2. Name Server Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.2.2. Name Server Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2.3. Entity Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.2.3. Entity Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4. Search Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4. Query Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Extensibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5. Extensibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6. Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6. Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1. Conventions Used in This Document 1. 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
skipping to change at page 3, line 10 skipping to change at page 3, line 17
was first described in a doctoral dissertation [REST]. was first described in a doctoral dissertation [REST].
RESTful: An adjective that describes a service using HTTP and the RESTful: An adjective that describes a service using HTTP and the
principles of REST. principles of REST.
RIR: Regional Internet Registry RIR: Regional Internet Registry
2. Introduction 2. Introduction
This document describes a specification for querying registration This document describes a specification for querying registration
data using a RESTful web service and uniform query patterns. The data using a RESTful web service and uniform query patterns. The
service is implemented using the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) service is implemented using the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP)
[RFC2616]. [I-D.ietf-httpbis-http2].
The protocol described in this specification is intended to address The protocol described in this specification is intended to address
deficiencies with the WHOIS protocol [RFC3912] that have been deficiencies with the WHOIS protocol [RFC3912] that have been
identified over time, including: identified over time, including:
o Lack of standardized command structures, o Lack of standardized command structures,
o lack of standardized output and error structures, o lack of standardized output and error structures,
o lack of support for internationalization and localization, and o lack of support for internationalization and localization, and
o lack of support for user identification, authentication, and o lack of support for user identification, authentication, and
access control. access control.
skipping to change at page 3, line 34 skipping to change at page 3, line 41
all of the RIRs and DNRs. The intent of the patterns described here all of the RIRs and DNRs. The intent of the patterns described here
are to enable queries of: are to enable queries of:
o networks by IP address, o networks by IP address,
o autonomous system numbers by number, o autonomous system numbers by number,
o reverse DNS meta-data by domain, o reverse DNS meta-data by domain,
o name servers by name, o name servers by name,
o registrars by name, and o registrars by name, and
o entities (such as contacts) by identifier. o entities (such as contacts) by identifier.
It is envisioned that each registry will continue to maintain NICNAME It is envisioned that each registry will continue to maintain
/WHOIS and/or RESTful web services specific to their needs and those NICNAME/WHOIS and/or RESTful web services specific to their needs and
of their constituencies, and the information retrieved through the those of their constituencies, and the information retrieved through
patterns described here may reference such services. the patterns described here may reference such services.
Likewise, future IETF standards may add additional patterns for Likewise, future IETF standards may add additional patterns for
additional query types. A simple pattern namespacing scheme is additional query types. A simple pattern namespacing scheme is
described in Section 5 to accommodate custom extensions that will not described in Section 5 to accommodate custom extensions that will not
interfere with the patterns defined in this document or patterns interfere with the patterns defined in this document or patterns
defined in future IETF standards. defined in future IETF standards.
WHOIS services, in general, are read-only services. Therefore URL WHOIS services, in general, are read-only services. Therefore URL
[RFC3986] patterns specified in this document are only applicable to [RFC3986] patterns specified in this document are only applicable to
the HTTP [RFC2616] GET and HEAD methods. the HTTP [RFC7231] GET and HEAD methods.
This document does not describe the results or entities returned from This document does not describe the results or entities returned from
issuing the described URLs with an HTTP GET. JSON [RFC4627] result issuing the described URLs with an HTTP GET. JSON [RFC7159] result
formatting and processing is described in formatting and processing is described in
[I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response]. [I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response].
Additionally, resource management, provisioning and update functions Additionally, resource management, provisioning and update functions
are out of scope for this document. Registries have various and are out of scope for this document. Registries have various and
divergent methods covering these functions, and it is unlikely a divergent methods covering these functions, and it is unlikely a
uniform approach for these functions will ever be possible. uniform approach for these functions will ever be possible.
HTTP contains mechanisms for servers to authenticate clients and for HTTP contains mechanisms for servers to authenticate clients and for
clients to authenticate servers (from which authorization schemes may clients to authenticate servers (from which authorization schemes may
be built) so such mechanisms are not described in this document. be built) so such mechanisms are not described in this document.
Policy, provisioning, and processing of authentication and Policy, provisioning, and processing of authentication and
authorization are out-of-scope for this document as deployments will authorization are out-of-scope for this document as deployments will
have to make choices based on local criteria. Specified have to make choices based on local criteria. Specified
authentication mechanisms MUST use HTTP. authentication mechanisms MUST use HTTP.
3. Path Segment Specification 3. Path Segment Specification
RDAP queries use well-known URLs [RFC5785] with the "rdap" prefix. The base URLs used to construct RDAP queries are maintained in an
Generally, a registry or other service provider will provide a base IANA registry described in [I-D.ietf-weirds-bootstrap]. Queries are
URL that identifies the protocol, host and port, and this will be formed by retrieving the appropriate base URL from the registry and
used as a base URL that the well-known URL is resolved against, as appending a path segment specified in either Section 3.1 or
per Section 5 of RFC 3986 [RFC3986]. Section 3.2. Generally, a registry or other service provider will
provide a base URL that identifies the protocol, host and port, and
this will be used as a base URL that the complete URL is resolved
against, as per Section 5 of RFC 3986 [RFC3986]. For example, if the
base URL is "http://example.com/rdap/", all RDAP query URLs will
begin with "http://example.com/rdap/".
For example, if the base URL is "http://example.com/", all RDAP query The bootstrap registry does not contain information for query objects
URLs will begin with "http://example.com/.well-known/rdap". that are not part of a global namespace, including entities and help.
A base URL for an associated object is required to construct a
complete query.
Note that path and query information in the base URL are not used, For entities: Retrieve a base URL for the service (domain, address,
because the well-known URL is rooted at "/.well-known/rdap"; for etc.) associated with a given entity. The query URL is constructed
example, if a registry provides "http://example.com/other/path" as a by concatenating the base URL to the entity path segment specified in
base URL, RDAP query URLs will still begin with "http://example.com/ either Section 3.1.5 or Section 3.2.3.
.well-known/rdap".
For help: Retrieve a base URL for any service (domain, address, etc.)
for which additional information is required. The query URL is
constructed by concatenating the base URL to the help path segment
specified in either Section 3.1.6.
3.1. Lookup Path Segment Specification 3.1. Lookup Path Segment Specification
The resource type path segments for exact match lookup are: The resource type path segments for exact match lookup are:
o 'ip': Used to identify IP networks and associated data referenced o 'ip': Used to identify IP networks and associated data referenced
using either an IPv4 or IPv6 address. using either an IPv4 or IPv6 address.
o 'autnum': Used to identify autonomous system registrations and o 'autnum': Used to identify autonomous system registrations and
associated data referenced using an AS Plain autonomous system associated data referenced using an AS Plain autonomous system
number. number.
skipping to change at page 5, line 11 skipping to change at page 5, line 30
using a host name. using a host name.
o 'entity': Used to identify an entity information query using a o 'entity': Used to identify an entity information query using a
string identifier. string identifier.
3.1.1. IP Network Path Segment Specification 3.1.1. IP Network Path Segment Specification
Syntax: ip/<IP address> or ip/<CIDR prefix>/<CIDR length> Syntax: ip/<IP address> or ip/<CIDR prefix>/<CIDR length>
Queries for information about IP networks are of the form /ip/XXX/... Queries for information about IP networks are of the form /ip/XXX/...
or /ip/XXX/YY/... where the path segment following 'ip' is either an or /ip/XXX/YY/... where the path segment following 'ip' is either an
IPv4 [RFC1166] or IPv6 [RFC5952] address (i.e. XXX) or an IPv4 or IPv4 [RFC1166] or IPv6 [RFC5952] address (i.e. XXX) or an IPv4 or
IPv6 CIDR [RFC4632] notation address block (i.e. XXX/YY). IPv6 CIDR [RFC4632] notation address block (i.e. XXX/YY).
Semantically, the simpler form using the address can be thought of as Semantically, the simpler form using the address can be thought of as
a CIDR block with a bitmask length of 32 for IPv4 and a bitmask a CIDR block with a bitmask length of 32 for IPv4 and a bitmask
length of 128 for IPv6. A given specific address or CIDR may fall length of 128 for IPv6. A given specific address or CIDR may fall
within multiple IP networks in a hierarchy of networks, therefore within multiple IP networks in a hierarchy of networks, therefore
this query targets the "most-specific" or smallest IP network which this query targets the "most-specific" or smallest IP network which
completely encompasses it in a hierarchy of IP networks. completely encompasses it in a hierarchy of IP networks.
The IPv4 and IPv6 address formats supported in this query are The IPv4 and IPv6 address formats supported in this query are
described in section 3.2.2 of [RFC3986], as IPv4address and described in section 3.2.2 of [RFC3986], as IPv4address and
IPv6address ABNF definitions. Any valid IPv6 text address format IPv6address ABNF definitions. Any valid IPv6 text address format
[RFC4291] can be used, compressed or not compressed. The restricted [RFC4291] can be used, compressed or not compressed. The restricted
rules to write a text representation of an IPv6 address [RFC5952] are rules to write a text representation of an IPv6 address [RFC5952] are
not mandatory. However, the zone id [RFC4007] is not appropriate in not mandatory. However, the zone id [RFC4007] is not appropriate in
this context and therefore prohibited. this context and therefore prohibited.
For example, the following URL would be used to find information for For example, the following URL would be used to find information for
the most specific network containing 192.0.2.0: the most specific network containing 192.0.2.0:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/ip/192.0.2.0 http://example.com/rdap/ip/192.0.2.0
The following URL would be used to find information for the most The following URL would be used to find information for the most
specific network containing 192.0.2.0/24: specific network containing 192.0.2.0/24:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/ip/192.0.2.0/24 http://example.com/rdap/ip/192.0.2.0/24
The following URL would be used to find information for the most The following URL would be used to find information for the most
specific network containing 2001:db8::0: specific network containing 2001:db8::0:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/ip/2001:db8::0 http://example.com/rdap/ip/2001:db8::0
3.1.2. Autonomous System Path Segment Specification 3.1.2. Autonomous System Path Segment Specification
Syntax: autnum/<autonomous system number> Syntax: autnum/<autonomous system number>
Queries for information regarding autonomous system number Queries for information regarding autonomous system number
registrations are of the form /autnum/XXX/... where XXX is an AS registrations are of the form /autnum/XXX/... where XXX is an AS
Plain autonomous system number [RFC5396]. In some registries, Plain autonomous system number [RFC5396]. In some registries,
registration of autonomous system numbers is done on an individual registration of autonomous system numbers is done on an individual
number basis, while other registries may register blocks of number basis, while other registries may register blocks of
autonomous system numbers. The semantics of this query are such that autonomous system numbers. The semantics of this query are such that
if a number falls within a range of registered blocks, the target of if a number falls within a range of registered blocks, the target of
the query is the block registration, and that individual number the query is the block registration, and that individual number
registrations are considered a block of numbers with a size of 1. registrations are considered a block of numbers with a size of 1.
For example, the following URL would be used to find information For example, the following URL would be used to find information
describing autonomous system number 12 (a number within a range of describing autonomous system number 12 (a number within a range of
registered blocks): registered blocks):
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/autnum/12 http://example.com/rdap/autnum/12
The following URL would be used to find information describing 4-byte The following URL would be used to find information describing 4-byte
autonomous system number 65538: autonomous system number 65538:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/autnum/65538 http://example.com/rdap/autnum/65538
3.1.3. Domain Path Segment Specification 3.1.3. Domain Path Segment Specification
Syntax: domain/<domain name> Syntax: domain/<domain name>
Queries for domain information are of the form /domain/XXXX/..., Queries for domain information are of the form /domain/XXXX/...,
where XXXX is a fully-qualified (relative to the root) domain name where XXXX is a fully-qualified (relative to the root) domain name
[RFC1594] in either the in-addr.arpa or ip6.arpa zones (for RIRs) or [RFC1594] in either the in-addr.arpa or ip6.arpa zones (for RIRs) or
a fully-qualified domain name in a zone administered by the server a fully-qualified domain name in a zone administered by the server
operator (for DNRs). Internationalized domain names represented in operator (for DNRs). Internationalized domain names represented in
skipping to change at page 6, line 40 skipping to change at page 7, line 13
U-labels; that is, any IDN SHOULD use only A-labels or only U-labels. U-labels; that is, any IDN SHOULD use only A-labels or only U-labels.
If the client sends the server an IDN in U-label format, servers that If the client sends the server an IDN in U-label format, servers that
support IDNs MUST convert the IDN into A-label format and perform support IDNs MUST convert the IDN into A-label format and perform
IDNA processing as specified in RFC 5891 [RFC5891]. The server IDNA processing as specified in RFC 5891 [RFC5891]. The server
should perform an exact match lookup using the A-label. should perform an exact match lookup using the A-label.
The following URL would be used to find information describing the The following URL would be used to find information describing the
zone serving the network 192.0.2/24: zone serving the network 192.0.2/24:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/domain/2.0.192.in-addr.arpa http://example.com/rdap/domain/2.0.192.in-addr.arpa
The following URL would be used to find information describing the The following URL would be used to find information describing the
zone serving the network 2001:db8:1::/48: zone serving the network 2001:db8:1::/48:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/domain/ http://example.com/rdap/domain/1.0.0.0.8.b.d.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa
1.0.0.0.8.b.d.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa
The following URL would be used to find information for the The following URL would be used to find information for the
blah.example.com domain name: blah.example.com domain name:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/domain/blah.example.com http://example.com/rdap/domain/blah.example.com
The following URL would be used to find information for the The following URL would be used to find information for the
xn--fo-5ja.example IDN: xn--fo-5ja.example IDN:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/domain/xn--fo-5ja.example http://example.com/rdap/domain/xn--fo-5ja.example
3.1.4. Name Server Path Segment Specification 3.1.4. Name Server Path Segment Specification
Syntax: nameserver/<name server name> Syntax: nameserver/<name server name>
The <name server name> parameter represents a fully qualified name as The <name server name> parameter represents a fully qualified name as
specified in RFC 952 [RFC0952] and RFC 1123 [RFC1123]. specified in RFC 952 [RFC0952] and RFC 1123 [RFC1123].
Internationalized names represented in either A-label or U-label Internationalized names represented in either A-label or U-label
format [RFC5890] are also valid name server names. IDN labels SHOULD format [RFC5890] are also valid name server names. IDN labels SHOULD
NOT be represented as a mixture of A-labels and U-labels. NOT be represented as a mixture of A-labels and U-labels.
If the client sends the server an IDN in U-label format, servers that If the client sends the server an IDN in U-label format, servers that
support IDNs MUST convert the IDN into A-label format and perform support IDNs MUST convert the IDN into A-label format and perform
IDNA processing as specified in RFC 5891 [RFC5891]. The server IDNA processing as specified in RFC 5891 [RFC5891]. The server
should perform an exact match lookup using the A-label. should perform an exact match lookup using the A-label.
The following URL would be used to find information for the The following URL would be used to find information for the
ns1.example.com name server: ns1.example.com name server:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/nameserver/ns1.example.com http://example.com/rdap/nameserver/ns1.example.com
The following URL would be used to find information for the The following URL would be used to find information for the
ns1.xn--fo-5ja.example name server: ns1.xn--fo-5ja.example name server:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/nameserver/ns1.xn--fo-5ja.example http://example.com/rdap/nameserver/ns1.xn--fo-5ja.example
3.1.5. Entity Path Segment Specification 3.1.5. Entity Path Segment Specification
Syntax: entity/<handle> Syntax: entity/<handle>
The <handle> parameter represents an entity (such as a contact, The <handle> parameter represents an entity (such as a contact,
registrant, or registrar) identifier. For example, for some DNRs registrant, or registrar) identifier. For example, for some DNRs
contact identifiers are specified in RFC 5730 [RFC5730] and RFC 5733 contact identifiers are specified in RFC 5730 [RFC5730] and RFC 5733
[RFC5733]. [RFC5733].
The following URL would be used to find information for the entity The following URL would be used to find information for the entity
associated with handle XXXX: associated with handle XXXX:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/entity/XXXX http://example.com/rdap/entity/XXXX
3.1.6. Help Path Segment Specification 3.1.6. Help Path Segment Specification
Syntax: help Syntax: help
The help path segment can be used to request helpful information The help path segment can be used to request helpful information
(command syntax, terms of service, privacy policy, rate limiting (command syntax, terms of service, privacy policy, rate limiting
policy, supported authentication methods, supported extensions, policy, supported authentication methods, supported extensions,
technical support contact, etc.) from an RDAP server. The response technical support contact, etc.) from an RDAP server. The response
to "help" should provide basic information that a client needs to to "help" should provide basic information that a client needs to
successfully use the service. The following URL would be used to successfully use the service. The following URL would be used to
return "help" information: return "help" information:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/help http://example.com/rdap/help
3.2. Search Path Segment Specification 3.2. Search Path Segment Specification
The resource type path segments for search are: The resource type path segments for search are:
o 'domains': Used to identify a domain name information search using o 'domains': Used to identify a domain name information search using
a pattern to match a fully-qualified domain name. a pattern to match a fully-qualified domain name.
o 'nameservers': Used to identify a name server information search o 'nameservers': Used to identify a name server information search
using a pattern to match a host name. using a pattern to match a host name.
o 'entities': Used to identify an entity information search using a o 'entities': Used to identify an entity information search using a
skipping to change at page 9, line 5 skipping to change at page 9, line 21
Searches for domain information are of the form Searches for domain information are of the form
/domains?name=XXXX /domains?name=XXXX
where XXXX is a search pattern representing a domain name in where XXXX is a search pattern representing a domain name in
"letters, digits, hyphen" format [RFC5890] in a zone administered by "letters, digits, hyphen" format [RFC5890] in a zone administered by
the server operator of a DNR. The following URL would be used to the server operator of a DNR. The following URL would be used to
find DNR information for domain names matching the "example*.com" find DNR information for domain names matching the "example*.com"
pattern: pattern:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/domains?name=example*.com http://example.com/rdap/domains?name=example*.com
Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) in U-label format [RFC5890] can Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) in U-label format [RFC5890] can
also be used as search patterns (see Section 4). Searches for these also be used as search patterns (see Section 4). Searches for these
names are of the form /domains?name=XXXX, where XXXX is a search names are of the form /domains?name=XXXX, where XXXX is a search
pattern representing a domain name in U-label format [RFC5890]. pattern representing a domain name in U-label format [RFC5890].
3.2.2. Name Server Search 3.2.2. Name Server Search
Syntax: nameservers?name=<nameserver search pattern> Syntax: nameservers?name=<nameserver search pattern>
skipping to change at page 9, line 28 skipping to change at page 9, line 44
/nameservers?name=XXXX /nameservers?name=XXXX
/nameservers?ip=YYYY /nameservers?ip=YYYY
XXXX is a search pattern representing a host name in "letters, XXXX is a search pattern representing a host name in "letters,
digits, hyphen" format [RFC5890] in a zone administered by the server digits, hyphen" format [RFC5890] in a zone administered by the server
operator of a DNR. The following URL would be used to find DNR operator of a DNR. The following URL would be used to find DNR
information for name server names matching the "ns1.example*.com" information for name server names matching the "ns1.example*.com"
pattern: pattern:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/nameservers?name=ns1.example*.com http://example.com/rdap/nameservers?name=ns1.example*.com
YYYY is a search pattern representing an IPv4 [RFC1166] or IPv6 YYYY is a search pattern representing an IPv4 [RFC1166] or IPv6
[RFC5952] address. The following URL would be used to search for [RFC5952] address. The following URL would be used to search for
name server names that resolve to the "192.0.2.0" address: name server names that resolve to the "192.0.2.0" address:
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/nameservers?ip=192.0.2.0 http://example.com/rdap/nameservers?ip=192.0.2.0
Internationalized name server names in U-label format [RFC5890] can Internationalized name server names in U-label format [RFC5890] can
also be used as search patterns (see Section 4). Searches for these also be used as search patterns (see Section 4). Searches for these
names are of the form /nameservers?name=XXXX, where XXXX is a search names are of the form /nameservers?name=XXXX, where XXXX is a search
pattern representing a name server name in U-label format [RFC5890]. pattern representing a name server name in U-label format [RFC5890].
3.2.3. Entity Search 3.2.3. Entity Search
Syntax: entities?fn=<entity name search pattern> Syntax: entities?fn=<entity name search pattern>
Syntax: entities?handle=<entity handle search pattern> Syntax: entities?handle=<entity handle search pattern>
Searches for entity information by name are of the form Searches for entity information by name are of the form
/entities?fn=XXXX /entities?fn=XXXX
where XXXX is a search pattern representing an entity name as where XXXX is a search pattern representing an entity name as
specified in Section 6.1 of [I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response]. The specified in Section 6.1 of [I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response]. The
following URL would be used to find information for entity names following URL would be used to find information for entity names
matching the "Bobby Joe*" pattern. matching the "Bobby Joe*" pattern.
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/entities?fn=Bobby%20Joe* http://example.com/rdap/entities?fn=Bobby%20Joe*
Searches for entity information by handle are of the form Searches for entity information by handle are of the form
/entities?handle=XXXX /entities?handle=XXXX
where XXXX is a search pattern representing an entity handle as where XXXX is a search pattern representing an entity handle as
specified in Section 6.1 of [I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response]. The specified in Section 6.1 of [I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response]. The
following URL would be used to find information for entity names following URL would be used to find information for entity names
matching the "CID-40*" pattern. matching the "CID-40*" pattern.
http://example.com/.well-known/rdap/entities?handle=CID-40* http://example.com/rdap/entities?handle=CID-40*
URLs MUST be properly encoded according to the rules of [RFC3986]. URLs MUST be properly encoded according to the rules of [RFC3986].
In the example above, "Bobby Joe*" is encoded to "Bobby%20Joe*". In the example above, "Bobby Joe*" is encoded to "Bobby%20Joe*".
4. Search Processing 4. Query Processing
Servers indicate the success or failure of query processing by
returning an appropriate HTTP response code to the client. Response
codes not specifically identified in this document are described in
[I-D.ietf-weirds-using-http].
Partial string searching uses the asterisk ('*', ASCII value 0x002A) Partial string searching uses the asterisk ('*', ASCII value 0x002A)
character to match zero or more trailing characters. A character character to match zero or more trailing characters. A character
string representing multiple domain name labels MAY be concatenated string representing multiple domain name labels MAY be concatenated
to the end of the search pattern to limit the scope of the search. to the end of the search pattern to limit the scope of the search.
For example, the search pattern "exam*" will match "example.com" and For example, the search pattern "exam*" will match "example.com" and
"example.net". The search pattern "exam*.com" will match "example.net". The search pattern "exam*.com" will match
"example.com". Additional pattern matching processing is beyond the "example.com". Note that these search patterns include implied
scope of this specification. beginning and end of string regular expression markers, and the
"example*.com" search would be translated into a POSIX regular
expression as "^example.*\.com$". Additional pattern matching
processing is beyond the scope of this specification.
If a server receives a search request but cannot process the request If a server receives a search request but cannot process the request
because it does not support a particular style of partial match because it does not support a particular style of partial match
searching, it SHOULD return an HTTP 422 [RFC4918] error. When searching, it SHOULD return an HTTP 422 [RFC4918] error. When
returning a 422 error, the server MAY also return an error response returning a 422 error, the server MAY also return an error response
body as specified in Section 7 of [I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response] if body as specified in Section 7 of [I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response] if
the requested media type is one that is specified in the requested media type is one that is specified in
[I-D.ietf-weirds-using-http]. [I-D.ietf-weirds-using-http].
Partial matching is not feasible across combinations of Unicode Partial matching is not feasible across combinations of Unicode
skipping to change at page 13, line 7 skipping to change at page 13, line 29
Internationalized domain and name server names can contain character Internationalized domain and name server names can contain character
variants and variant labels as described in RFC 4290 [RFC4290]. variants and variant labels as described in RFC 4290 [RFC4290].
Clients that support queries for internationalized domain and name Clients that support queries for internationalized domain and name
server names MUST accept service provider responses that describe server names MUST accept service provider responses that describe
variants as specified in "JSON Responses for the Registration Data variants as specified in "JSON Responses for the Registration Data
Access Protocol" [I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response]. Access Protocol" [I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response].
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to register the "rdap" well-known URI suffix This document does not specify any IANA actions.
following the procedures identified in RFC 5785 [RFC5785].
URI suffix: "rdap"
Change controller: IETF
Specification document: This document, Section 3.
Related information: None
8. Security Considerations 8. Security Considerations
Security services for the operations specified in this document are Security services for the operations specified in this document are
described in "Security Services for the Registration Data Access described in "Security Services for the Registration Data Access
Protocol" [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-sec]. Protocol" [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-sec].
Search functionality typically requires more server resources (such Search functionality typically requires more server resources (such
as memory, CPU cycles, and network bandwidth) when compared to basic as memory, CPU cycles, and network bandwidth) when compared to basic
lookup functionality. This increases the risk of server resource lookup functionality. This increases the risk of server resource
skipping to change at page 13, line 50 skipping to change at page 14, line 17
example, a search that returns IDN variants [RFC6927] that do not example, a search that returns IDN variants [RFC6927] that do not
explicitly match a client-provided search pattern can disclose explicitly match a client-provided search pattern can disclose
information about registered domain names that might not be otherwise information about registered domain names that might not be otherwise
available. Implementers need to consider the policy and privacy available. Implementers need to consider the policy and privacy
implications of returning information that was not explicitly implications of returning information that was not explicitly
requested. requested.
9. Acknowledgements 9. Acknowledgements
This document is derived from original work on RIR query formats This document is derived from original work on RIR query formats
developed by Byron J. Ellacott of APNIC, Arturo L. Servin of LACNIC, developed by Byron J. Ellacott of APNIC, Arturo L. Servin of
Kaveh Ranjbar of the RIPE NCC, and Andrew L. Newton of ARIN. LACNIC, Kaveh Ranjbar of the RIPE NCC, and Andrew L. Newton of ARIN.
Additionally, this document incorporates DNR query formats originally Additionally, this document incorporates DNR query formats originally
described by Francisco Arias and Steve Sheng of ICANN and Scott described by Francisco Arias and Steve Sheng of ICANN and Scott
Hollenbeck of Verisign Labs. Hollenbeck of Verisign Labs.
The authors would like to acknowledge the following individuals for The authors would like to acknowledge the following individuals for
their contributions to this document: Francisco Arias, Marc Blanchet, their contributions to this document: Francisco Arias, Marc Blanchet,
Ernie Dainow, Jean-Philippe Dionne, Behnam Esfahbod, John Klensin, Ernie Dainow, Jean-Philippe Dionne, Behnam Esfahbod, John Klensin,
Edward Lewis, John Levine, Mark Nottingham, and Andrew Sullivan. Edward Lewis, John Levine, Mark Nottingham, and Andrew Sullivan.
10. References 10. References
10.1. Normative References 10.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-httpbis-http2]
Belshe, M., Peon, R., and M. Thomson, "Hypertext Transfer
Protocol version 2", draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-13 (work in
progress), June 2014.
[I-D.ietf-weirds-bootstrap]
Blanchet, M. and G. Leclanche, "Finding the Authoritative
Registration Data (RDAP) Service", draft-ietf-weirds-
bootstrap-04 (work in progress), July 2014.
[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-06 (work in progress), October 2013. weirds-json-response-07 (work in progress), April 2014.
[I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-sec] [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-sec]
Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the
Registration Data Access Protocol", draft-ietf-weirds- Registration Data Access Protocol", draft-ietf-weirds-
rdap-sec-05 (work in progress), August 2013. rdap-sec-06 (work in progress), February 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-07 (work in progress), July 2013. weirds-using-http-08 (work in progress), February 2014.
[RFC0952] Harrenstien, K., Stahl, M., and E. Feinler, "DoD Internet [RFC0952] Harrenstien, K., Stahl, M., and E. Feinler, "DoD Internet
host table specification", RFC 952, October 1985. host table specification", RFC 952, October 1985.
[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and [RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
[RFC1123] Braden, R., "Requirements for Internet Hosts - Application [RFC1123] Braden, R., "Requirements for Internet Hosts - Application
and Support", STD 3, RFC 1123, October 1989. and Support", STD 3, RFC 1123, October 1989.
[RFC1166] Kirkpatrick, S., Stahl, M., and M. Recker, "Internet [RFC1166] Kirkpatrick, S., Stahl, M., and M. Recker, "Internet
numbers", RFC 1166, July 1990. numbers", RFC 1166, July 1990.
[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.
[RFC2616] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H.,
Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext
Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.
[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform [RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC
3986, January 2005. 3986, January 2005.
[RFC4290] Klensin, J., "Suggested Practices for Registration of [RFC4290] Klensin, J., "Suggested Practices for Registration of
Internationalized Domain Names (IDN)", RFC 4290, December Internationalized Domain Names (IDN)", RFC 4290, December
2005. 2005.
[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.
skipping to change at page 15, line 32 skipping to change at page 16, line 5
[RFC5396] Huston, G. and G. Michaelson, "Textual Representation of [RFC5396] Huston, G. and G. Michaelson, "Textual Representation of
Autonomous System (AS) Numbers", RFC 5396, December 2008. Autonomous System (AS) Numbers", RFC 5396, December 2008.
[RFC5730] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)", [RFC5730] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)",
STD 69, RFC 5730, August 2009. STD 69, RFC 5730, August 2009.
[RFC5733] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) [RFC5733] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
Contact Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5733, August 2009. Contact Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5733, August 2009.
[RFC5785] Nottingham, M. and E. Hammer-Lahav, "Defining Well-Known
Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)", RFC 5785, April
2010.
[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.
[RFC5891] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names in [RFC5891] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names in
Applications (IDNA): Protocol", RFC 5891, August 2010. Applications (IDNA): Protocol", RFC 5891, August 2010.
[RFC5952] Kawamura, S. and M. Kawashima, "A Recommendation for IPv6 [RFC5952] Kawamura, S. and M. Kawashima, "A Recommendation for IPv6
Address Text Representation", RFC 5952, August 2010. Address Text Representation", RFC 5952, August 2010.
[RFC7231] Fielding, R. and J. Reschke, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol
(HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content", RFC 7231, June 2014.
[Unicode-UAX15] [Unicode-UAX15]
The Unicode Consortium, "Unicode Standard Annex #15: The Unicode Consortium, "Unicode Standard Annex #15:
Unicode Normalization Forms", September 2013, Unicode Normalization Forms", September 2013,
<http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr15/>. <http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr15/>.
10.2. Informative References 10.2. Informative References
[REST] Fielding, R. and R. Taylor, "Principled Design of the [REST] Fielding, R. and R. Taylor, "Principled Design of the
Modern Web Architecture", ACM Transactions on Internet Modern Web Architecture", ACM Transactions on Internet
Technology Vol. 2, No. 2, May 2002. Technology Vol. 2, No. 2, May 2002.
skipping to change at page 16, line 22 skipping to change at page 16, line 40
and Answers - Answers to Commonly asked "New Internet and Answers - Answers to Commonly asked "New Internet
User" Questions", RFC 1594, March 1994. User" Questions", RFC 1594, March 1994.
[RFC3912] Daigle, L., "WHOIS Protocol Specification", RFC 3912, [RFC3912] Daigle, L., "WHOIS Protocol Specification", RFC 3912,
September 2004. September 2004.
[RFC4007] Deering, S., Haberman, B., Jinmei, T., Nordmark, E., and [RFC4007] Deering, S., Haberman, B., Jinmei, T., Nordmark, E., and
B. Zill, "IPv6 Scoped Address Architecture", RFC 4007, B. Zill, "IPv6 Scoped Address Architecture", RFC 4007,
March 2005. March 2005.
[RFC4627] Crockford, D., "The application/json Media Type for
JavaScript Object Notation (JSON)", RFC 4627, July 2006.
[RFC6927] Levine, J. and P. Hoffman, "Variants in Second-Level Names [RFC6927] Levine, J. and P. Hoffman, "Variants in Second-Level Names
Registered in Top-Level Domains", RFC 6927, May 2013. Registered in Top-Level Domains", RFC 6927, May 2013.
[RFC7159] Bray, T., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
Interchange Format", RFC 7159, March 2014.
Appendix A. Change Log Appendix A. Change Log
Initial -00: Adopted as working group document. Initial -00: Adopted as working group document.
-01: Added "Conventions Used in This Document" section. Added -01: Added "Conventions Used in This Document" section. Added
normative reference to draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-sec and some normative reference to draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-sec and some
wrapping text in the Security Considerations section. wrapping text in the Security Considerations section.
-02: Removed "unified" from the title. Rewrote the last paragraph -02: Removed "unified" from the title. Rewrote the last paragraph
of section 2. Edited the first paragraph of section 3 to more of section 2. Edited the first paragraph of section 3 to more
clearly note that only one path segment is provided. Added clearly note that only one path segment is provided. Added
"bitmask" to "length" in section 3.1. Changed "lowest IP network" "bitmask" to "length" in section 3.1. Changed "lowest IP network"
to "smallest IP network" in section 3.1. Added "asplain" to the to "smallest IP network" in section 3.1. Added "asplain" to the
description of autonomous system numbers in section 3.2. Minor description of autonomous system numbers in section 3.2. Minor
change from "semantics is" to "semantics are" in section 3.2. change from "semantics is" to "semantics are" in section 3.2.
Changed the last sentence in section 4 to more clearly specify Changed the last sentence in section 4 to more clearly specify
error response behavior. Added acknowledgements. Added a error response behavior. Added acknowledgements. Added a
paragraph in the introduction regarding future IETF standards and paragraph in the introduction regarding future IETF standards and
skipping to change at page 17, line 20 skipping to change at page 17, line 37
-07: Fixed query parameter typo by replacing "/?" with "?". Changed -07: Fixed query parameter typo by replacing "/?" with "?". Changed
"asplain" to "AS Plain". Added entity search by handle. "asplain" to "AS Plain". Added entity search by handle.
Corrected section references. Updated IDN search text. Corrected section references. Updated IDN search text.
-08: Revised URI formats and added IANA instructions to create a -08: Revised URI formats and added IANA instructions to create a
registry entry for the "rdap" well-known prefix. Revised search registry entry for the "rdap" well-known prefix. Revised search
processing text and added search privacy consideration. processing text and added search privacy consideration.
Synchronized examples with response draft. Synchronized examples with response draft.
-09: More search processing and URI prefix updates. Updated fully- -09: More search processing and URI prefix updates. Updated fully-
qualified domain name reference. qualified domain name reference.
-10: Added name server search by IP address. -10: Added name server search by IP address.
-11: Replaced reference to RFC 4627 with reference to RFC 7159.
Replaced .well-known with bootstrap-defined prefix. Replaced
references to RFC 2616 with references to RFC 7231 and draft-ietf-
httpbis-http2, adding a note to make it clear that 2616 is an
acceptable reference if http2 isn't ready when needed.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Andrew Lee Newton Andrew Lee Newton
American Registry for Internet Numbers American Registry for Internet Numbers
3635 Concorde Parkway 3635 Concorde Parkway
Chantilly, VA 20151 Chantilly, VA 20151
US US
Email: andy@arin.net Email: andy@arin.net
 End of changes. 52 change blocks. 
83 lines changed or deleted 108 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/