Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-dtn-bpv7-admin-iana
draft-ietf-dtn-bpv7-admin-iana
Delay-Tolerant Networking B. Sipos
Internet-Draft JHU/APL
Updates: 9171 (if approved) 10 August 2023
Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: 11 February 2024
Bundle Protocol Version 7 Administrative Record Types Registry
draft-ietf-dtn-bpv7-admin-iana-02
Abstract
This document clarifies that a Bundle Protocol Version 7 agent is
intended to use an IANA sub-registry for Administrative Record types.
It also makes a code point reservation for private or experimental
use.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 11 February 2024.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Sipos Expires 11 February 2024 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft BPv7 Admin IANA August 2023
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Administrative Record Types Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.1. Bundle Administrative Record Types . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1. Introduction
The earlier Bundle Protocol (BP) Version 6 (BPv6) defined an IANA
sub-registry for Administrative Record type code points under
[IANA-BP]. When Bundle Protocol Version 7 (BPv7) was published in
[RFC9171] it included an explicit table of Administrative Record
types but made no mention of an IANA registry nor a requirement for
BPv7 agents to be extensible in how they handle Administrative Record
types. The BPv7 specification also did not discriminate between code
point reservations and unassigned ranges for Administrative Record
types.
This document updates BPv7 to explicitly use the IANA Administrative
Record type registry in Section 2. This document makes a reservation
of the zero value for consistency with BPv6. This document also
makes a reservation of high-valued code points for private or
experimental use to avoid collisions with assigned code points.
1.1. Scope
This document describes updates to the IANA Administrative Record
type sub-registry and how a BPv7 agent is supposed to use that
registry for identifying Administrative Record types.
This document does not specify how BPv6 and BPv7 can interoperate for
overlapping code points or how a specific code point is to be
interpreted either similarly or differently between Bundle Protocol
versions. It is up to each individual Administrative Record type
specification to define how it relates to each BP version.
Sipos Expires 11 February 2024 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft BPv7 Admin IANA August 2023
1.2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
2. Administrative Record Types Registry
This document updates the requirements in Section 6.1 of [RFC9171] to
use an existing IANA registry and updates that sub-registry in
Section 4.1.
The code point allocated in Annex D of [CCSDS-BP] was never added to
the IANA registry. To avoid a collision, this document adds that
allocation to the registry.
Instead of using the explicit list of types in Section 6.1 of
[RFC9171], a BPv7 administrative element SHALL interpret
administrative record type code values in accordance with the IANA
"Bundle Administrative Record Types" sub-registry under [IANA-BP] for
entries having a "Bundle Protocol Version" of 7.
If an administrative element receives a not-well-formed ADU or an
administrative record type code which is not able to be processed by
the element, the record SHALL be ignored by the element. The
processing of a received administrative record ADU does not affect
the fact that the bundle itself was delivered to the administrative
element or any related BPA processing of (e.g. status reports on) the
enveloping bundle.
3. Security Considerations
This document does not define any requirements or structures which
introduce new security considerations.
The existing security considerations of [RFC9171] still apply when
using the IANA Administrative Record Types sub-registry.
4. IANA Considerations
This specification modifies a BPv6 sub-registry to extend BPv7.
Sipos Expires 11 February 2024 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft BPv7 Admin IANA August 2023
4.1. Bundle Administrative Record Types
Within the "Bundle Protocol" registry [IANA-BP], the "Bundle
Administrative Record Types" sub-registry has been updated to include
a leftmost "Bundle Protocol Version" column. New entries have been
added and existing entries have been updated to have BP versions as
in the following table. This document makes no changes to the
registration procedures for this sub-registry.
+=================+============+==================+=================+
| Bundle Protocol | Value | Description | Reference |
| Version | | | |
+=================+============+==================+=================+
| 6,7 | 0 | Reserved | [RFC7116] [This |
| | | | specification] |
+-----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+
| 6,7 | 1 | Bundle status | [RFC5050] |
| | | report | [RFC9171] |
+-----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+
| 6 | 2 | Custody signal | [RFC5050] |
+-----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+
| 6,7 | 3 | Unassigned | |
+-----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+
| 6 | 4 | Aggregate | [CCSDS-BP] |
| | | Custody Signal | |
+-----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+
| 6,7 | 5-15 | Unassigned | |
+-----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+
| 7 | 16-65535 | Unassigned | |
+-----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+
| 7 | greater | Reserved for | [This |
| | than | Private or | specification] |
| | 65535 | Experimental Use | |
+-----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+
Table 1: Bundle Administrative Record Types
5. References
5.1. Normative References
[IANA-BP] IANA, "Bundle Protocol",
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/bundle/>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
Sipos Expires 11 February 2024 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft BPv7 Admin IANA August 2023
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC9171] Burleigh, S., Fall, K., and E. Birrane, III, "Bundle
Protocol Version 7", RFC 9171, DOI 10.17487/RFC9171,
January 2022, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9171>.
5.2. Informative References
[CCSDS-BP] Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems, "CCSDS
Bundle Protocol Specification", CCSDS 734.2-B-1, September
2015, <https://public.ccsds.org/Pubs/734x2b1.pdf>.
[RFC5050] Scott, K. and S. Burleigh, "Bundle Protocol
Specification", RFC 5050, DOI 10.17487/RFC5050, November
2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5050>.
[RFC7116] Scott, K. and M. Blanchet, "Licklider Transmission
Protocol (LTP), Compressed Bundle Header Encoding (CBHE),
and Bundle Protocol IANA Registries", RFC 7116,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7116, February 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7116>.
Acknowledgments
Author's Address
Brian Sipos
The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
11100 Johns Hopkins Rd.
Laurel, MD 20723
United States of America
Email: brian.sipos+ietf@gmail.com
Sipos Expires 11 February 2024 [Page 5]
