Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-regext-allocation-token
draft-ietf-regext-allocation-token
Network Working Group J. Gould
Internet-Draft VeriSign, Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track K. Feher
Expires: April 7, 2019 Neustar
October 04, 2018
Allocation Token Extension for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol
(EPP)
draft-ietf-regext-allocation-token-12
Abstract
This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
extension for including an Allocation Token in "query" and
"transform" commands. The Allocation Token is used as a credential
that authorizes a client to request the allocation of a specific
object from the server, using one of the EPP transform commands
including create and transfer.
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 April 7, 2019.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 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
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Object Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. Allocation Token . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. EPP Command Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. EPP Query Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1.1. EPP <check> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1.2. EPP <info> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.1.3. EPP <transfer> Query Command . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.2. EPP Transform Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.2.1. EPP <create> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.2.2. EPP <delete> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.2.3. EPP <renew> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.2.4. EPP <transfer> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.2.5. EPP <update> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4. Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.1. Allocation Token Extension Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.1. XML Namespace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.2. EPP Extension Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6.1. Verisign EPP SDK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.2. Neustar EPP SDK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.3. Neustar gTLD SRS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6.4. Net::DRI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Appendix A. Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
A.1. Change from 00 to 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
A.2. Change from 01 to 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
A.3. Change from 02 to 03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A.4. Change from 03 to 04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A.5. Change from 04 to REGEXT 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A.6. Change from REGEXT 00 to REGEXT 01 . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A.7. Change from REGEXT 01 to REGEXT 02 . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A.8. Change from REGEXT 02 to REGEXT 03 . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A.9. Change from REGEXT 03 to REGEXT 04 . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A.10. Change from REGEXT 04 to REGEXT 05 . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A.11. Change from REGEXT 05 to REGEXT 06 . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
A.12. Change from REGEXT 06 to REGEXT 07 . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.13. Change from REGEXT 07 to REGEXT 08 . . . . . . . . . . . 23
A.14. Change from REGEXT 08 to REGEXT 09 . . . . . . . . . . . 24
A.15. Change from REGEXT 09 to REGEXT 10 . . . . . . . . . . . 24
A.16. Change from REGEXT 10 to REGEXT 11 . . . . . . . . . . . 25
A.17. Change from REGEXT 11 to REGEXT 12 . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
1. Introduction
This document describes an extension mapping for version 1.0 of the
Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) [RFC5730]. This mapping, an
extension to EPP object mappings like the EPP domain name mapping
[RFC5731], supports passing an Allocation Token as a credential that
authorizes a client to request the allocation of a specific object
from the server, using one of the EPP transform commands including
create and transfer.
Allocation is when a server assigns the sponsoring client of an
object based on the use of an Allocation Token credential. Examples
include allocating a registration based on a pre-eligibility
Allocation Token, allocating a premium domain name registration based
on an auction Allocation Token, allocating a registration based on a
founders Allocation Token, and allocating an existing domain name
held by the server or by a different sponsoring client based on an
Allocation Token passed with a transfer command.
Clients pass an Allocation Token to the server for validation, and
the server determines if the supplied Allocation Token is one
supported by the server. It is up to server policy which EPP
transform commands and which objects require the Allocation Token.
The Allocation Token MAY be returned to an authorized client for
passing out-of-band to a client that uses it with an EPP transform
command.
1.1. Conventions Used in This Document
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.
XML is case sensitive. Unless stated otherwise, XML specifications
and examples provided in this document MUST be interpreted in the
character case presented in order to develop a conforming
implementation.
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
In examples, "C:" represents lines sent by a protocol client and "S:"
represents lines returned by a protocol server. Indentation and
white space in the examples are provided only to illustrate element
relationships and are not REQUIRED in the protocol.
The XML namespace prefix "allocationToken" is used for the namespace
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0", but implementations
MUST NOT depend on it and instead employ a proper namespace-aware XML
parser and serializer to interpret and output the XML documents.
The "abc123" token value is used as a placeholder value in the
examples. The server MUST support token values that follow the
Security Considerations (Section 7) section.
The domain object attribute values, including the "2fooBAR"
<domain:pw> value, in the examples are provided for illustration
purposes only. Refer to [RFC5731] for details on the domain object
attributes.
2. Object Attributes
This extension adds additional elements to EPP object mappings like
the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731]. Only those new elements are
described here.
2.1. Allocation Token
The Allocation Token is a simple XML "token" type. The exact format
of the Allocation Token is up to server policy. The server MAY have
the Allocation Token for each object to match against the Allocation
Token passed by the client to authorize the allocation of the object.
The <allocationToken:allocationToken> element is used for all of the
supported EPP commands as well as the info response. If the supplied
Allocation Token passed to the server does not apply to the object,
the server MUST return an EPP error result code of 2201.
Authorization information, like what is defined in the EPP domain
name mapping [RFC5731], is associated with objects to facilitate
transfer operations. The authorization information is assigned when
an object is created. The Allocation Token and the authorization
information are both credentials, but used for different purposes and
used in different ways. The Allocation Token is used to facilitate
the allocation of an object instead of transferring the sponsorship
of the object. The Allocation Token is not managed by the client,
but is validated by the server to authorize assigning the initial
sponsoring client of the object.
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
An example <allocationToken:allocationToken> element with value of
"abc123":
<allocationToken:allocationToken xmlns:allocationToken=
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0">
abc123
</allocationToken:allocationToken>
3. EPP Command Mapping
A detailed description of the EPP syntax and semantics can be found
in the EPP core protocol specification [RFC5730].
3.1. EPP Query Commands
EPP provides three commands to retrieve object information: <check>
to determine if an object can be provisioned, <info> to retrieve
information associated with an object, and <transfer> to retrieve
object transfer status information.
3.1.1. EPP <check> Command
This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP <check>
command of an object mapping like [RFC5731].
This extension allows clients to check the availability of an object
with an Allocation Token, as described in Section 2.1. Clients can
check if an object can be created using the Allocation Token. The
Allocation Token is applied to all object names included in the EPP
<check> command.
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
Example <check> command for the allocation.example domain name using
the <allocationToken:allocationToken> extension with the allocation
token of 'abc123':
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <check>
C: <domain:check
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>allocation.example</domain:name>
C: </domain:check>
C: </check>
C: <extension>
C: <allocationToken:allocationToken
C: xmlns:allocationToken=
C: "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0">
C: abc123
C: </allocationToken:allocationToken>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
If the query was successful, the server replies with a <check>
response providing the availability status of the queried object
based on the following Allocation Token cases, where the object is
otherwise available:
1. If an object requires an Allocation Token and the Allocation
Token does apply to the object, then the server MUST return the
availability status as available (e.g., "avail" attribute is "1"
or "true").
2. If an object requires an Allocation Token and the Allocation
Token does not apply to the object, then the server SHOULD return
the availability status as unavailable (e.g., "avail" attribute
is "0" or "false").
3. If an object does not require an Allocation Token, the server MAY
return the availability status as available (e.g., "avail"
attribute is "1" or "true").
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
Example <check> domain response for a <check> command using the
<allocationToken:allocationToken> extension:
S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
S: <response>
S: <result code="1000">
S: <msg lang="en-US">Command completed successfully</msg>
S: </result>
S: <resData>
S: <domain:chkData
S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
S: <domain:cd>
S: <domain:name avail="1">allocation.example</domain:name>
S: </domain:cd>
S: </domain:chkData>
S: </resData>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-DEF-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
Example <check> command with the <allocationToken:allocationToken>
extension for the allocation.example and allocation2.example domain
names. Availability of allocation.example and allocation2.example
domain names are based on the Allocation Token 'abc123':
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <check>
C: <domain:check
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>allocation.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:name>allocation2.example</domain:name>
C: </domain:check>
C: </check>
C: <extension>
C: <allocationToken:allocationToken
C: xmlns:allocationToken=
C: "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0">
C: abc123
C: </allocationToken:allocationToken>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-DEF-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
Example <check> domain response for multiple domain names in the
<check> command using the <allocationToken:allocationToken>
extension, where the Allocation Token 'abc123' matches
allocation.example but does not match allocation2.example:
S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
S: <response>
S: <result code="1000">
S: <msg lang="en-US">Command completed successfully</msg>
S: </result>
S: <resData>
S: <domain:chkData
S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
S: <domain:cd>
S: <domain:name avail="1">allocation.example</domain:name>
S: </domain:cd>
S: <domain:cd>
S: <domain:name avail="0">allocation2.example</domain:name>
S: <domain:reason>Allocation Token mismatch</domain:reason>
S: </domain:cd>
S: </domain:chkData>
S: </resData>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-DEF-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <check> response
described in the [RFC5730].
3.1.2. EPP <info> Command
This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP <info>
command of an object mapping like [RFC5731].
The EPP <info> command allows a client to request information
associated with an existing object. Authorized clients MAY retrieve
the Allocation Token (Section 2.1) along with the other object
information by supplying the <allocationToken:info> element in the
command. The <allocationToken:info> element is an empty element that
serves as a marker to the server to return the
<allocationToken:allocationToken> element in the info response. If
the client is not authorized to receive the Allocation Token, the
server MUST return an EPP error result code of 2201. If the client
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
is authorized to receive the Allocation Token, but there is no
Allocation Token associated with the object, the server MUST return
an EPP error result code of 2303. The authorization is subject to
server policy.
Example <info> command with the allocationToken:info extension for
the allocation.example domain name:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <info>
C: <domain:info
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0"
C: xsi:schemaLocation="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0
C: domain-1.0.xsd">
C: <domain:name>allocation.example</domain:name>
C: </domain:info>
C: </info>
C: <extension>
C: <allocationToken:info
C: xmlns:allocationToken=
C: "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0/>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
If the query was successful, the server replies with an
<allocationToken:allocationToken> element along with the regular EPP
<resData>. The <allocationToken:allocationToken> element is
described in Section 2.1.
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
Example <info> domain response using the
<allocationToken:allocationToken> extension:
S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
S: <response>
S: <result code="1000">
S: <msg>Command completed successfully</msg>
S: </result>
S: <resData>
S: <domain:infData
S: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
S: <domain:name>allocation.example</domain:name>
S: <domain:roid>EXAMPLE1-REP</domain:roid>
S: <domain:status s="pendingCreate"/>
S: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
S: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
S: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
S: <domain:clID>ClientX</domain:clID>
S: <domain:crID>ClientY</domain:crID>
S: <domain:crDate>2012-04-03T22:00:00.0Z</domain:crDate>
S: <domain:authInfo>
S: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
S: </domain:authInfo>
S: </domain:infData>
S: </resData>
S: <extension>
S: <allocationToken:allocationToken
S: xmlns:allocationToken=
S: "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0">
S: abc123
S: </allocationToken:allocationToken>
S: </extension>
S: <trID>
S: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
S: <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
S: </trID>
S: </response>
S:</epp>
3.1.3. EPP <transfer> Query Command
This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <transfer> query
command or <transfer> query response described in [RFC5730].
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
3.2. EPP Transform Commands
EPP provides five commands to transform objects: <create> to create
an instance of an object, <delete> to delete an instance of an
object, <renew> to extend the validity period of an object,
<transfer> to manage object sponsorship changes, and <update> to
change information associated with an object.
3.2.1. EPP <create> Command
This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP <create>
command of an object mapping like [RFC5731].
The EPP <create> command provides a transform operation that allows a
client to create an instance of an object. In addition to the EPP
command elements described in an object mapping like [RFC5731], the
command MUST contain a child <allocationToken:allocationToken>
element for the client to be authorized to create and allocate the
object. If the Allocation Token does not apply to the object, the
server MUST return an EPP error result code of 2201.
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
Example <create> command to create a domain object with an Allocation
Token:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <create>
C: <domain:create
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>allocation.example</domain:name>
C: <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
C: <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
C: <domain:authInfo>
C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
C: </domain:authInfo>
C: </domain:create>
C: </create>
C: <extension>
C: <allocationToken:allocationToken
C: xmlns:allocationToken=
C: "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0">
C: abc123
C: </allocationToken:allocationToken>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <create> response
described in the [RFC5730].
3.2.2. EPP <delete> Command
This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <delete> command
or <delete> response described in the [RFC5730].
3.2.3. EPP <renew> Command
This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <renew> command
or <renew> response described in the [RFC5730].
3.2.4. EPP <transfer> Command
This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP
<transfer> request command of an object mapping like [RFC5731].
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
The EPP <transfer> request command provides a transform operation
that allows a client to request the transfer of an object. In
addition to the EPP command elements described in an object mapping
like [RFC5731], the command MUST contain a child
<allocationToken:allocationToken> element for the client to be
authorized to transfer and allocate the object. The authorization
associated with the Allocation Token is in addition to and does not
replace the authorization mechanism defined for the object's
<transfer> request command. If the Allocation Token is invalid or
not required for the object, the server MUST return an EPP error
result code of 2201.
Example <transfer> request command to allocate the domain object with
the Allocation Token:
C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
C: <command>
C: <transfer op="request">
C: <domain:transfer
C: xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
C: <domain:name>example1.tld</domain:name>
C: <domain:period unit="y">1</domain:period>
C: <domain:authInfo>
C: <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
C: </domain:authInfo>
C: </domain:transfer>
C: </transfer>
C: <extension>
C: <allocationToken:allocationToken
C: xmlns:allocationToken=
C: "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0">
C: abc123
C: </allocationToken:allocationToken>
C: </extension>
C: <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
C: </command>
C:</epp>
This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <transfer>
response described in the [RFC5730].
3.2.5. EPP <update> Command
This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <update> command
or <update> response described in the [RFC5730].
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
4. Formal Syntax
One schema is presented here that is the EPP Allocation Token
Extension schema.
The formal syntax presented here is a complete schema representation
of the object mapping suitable for automated validation of EPP XML
instances. The BEGIN and END tags are not part of the schema; they
are used to note the beginning and ending of the schema for URI
registration purposes.
4.1. Allocation Token Extension Schema
BEGIN
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<schema xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
xmlns:allocationToken="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0"
targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0"
elementFormDefault="qualified">
<annotation>
<documentation>
Extensible Provisioning Protocol v1.0
Allocation Token Extension
</documentation>
</annotation>
<!-- Element used in info command to get allocation token. -->
<element name="info">
<complexType>
<complexContent>
<restriction base="anyType" />
</complexContent>
</complexType>
</element>
<!-- Allocation Token used in transform
commands and info response -->
<element name="allocationToken"
type="allocationToken:allocationTokenType" />
<simpleType name="allocationTokenType">
<restriction base="token">
<minLength value="1" />
</restriction>
</simpleType>
<!-- End of schema. -->
</schema>
END
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
5. IANA Considerations
5.1. XML Namespace
This document uses URNs to describe XML namespaces and XML schemas
conforming to a registry mechanism described in [RFC3688].
Registration request for the allocationToken namespace:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0
Registrant Contact: IESG
XML: None. Namespace URIs do not represent an XML specification.
Registration request for the allocationToken XML schema:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:allocationToken-1.0
Registrant Contact: IESG
XML: See the "Formal Syntax" section of this document.
5.2. EPP Extension Registry
The following registration of the EPP Extension Registry, described
in [RFC7451], is requested:
Name of Extension: "Allocation Token Extension for the Extensible
Provisioning Protocol (EPP)"
Document status: Standards Track
Reference: (insert reference to RFC version of this document)
Registrant Name and Email Address: IESG, <iesg@ietf.org>
TLDs: Any
IPR Disclosure: None
Status: Active
Notes: None
6. Implementation Status
Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this section and the reference to
RFC 7942 [RFC7942] before publication.
This section records the status of known implementations of the
protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in RFC 7942
[RFC7942]. The description of implementations in this section is
intended to assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing
drafts to RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual
implementation here does not imply endorsement by the IETF.
Furthermore, no effort has been spent to verify the information
presented here that was supplied by IETF contributors. This is not
intended as, and must not be construed to be, a catalog of available
implementations or their features. Readers are advised to note that
other implementations may exist.
According to RFC 7942 [RFC7942], "this will allow reviewers and
working groups to assign due consideration to documents that have the
benefit of running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable
experimentation and feedback that have made the implemented protocols
more mature. It is up to the individual working groups to use this
information as they see fit".
6.1. Verisign EPP SDK
Organization: Verisign Inc.
Name: Verisign EPP SDK
Description: The Verisign EPP SDK includes both a full client
implementation and a full server stub implementation of draft-ietf-
regext-allocation-token.
Level of maturity: Production
Coverage: All aspects of the protocol are implemented.
Licensing: GNU Lesser General Public License
Contact: jgould@verisign.com
URL: https://www.verisign.com/en_US/channel-resources/domain-
registry-products/epp-sdks
6.2. Neustar EPP SDK
Organisation: Neustar Inc.
Name: Neustar EPP SDK
Description: The Neustar EPP SDK includes a full client
implementation of draft-ietf-regext-allocation-token.
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
Level of maturity: Production
Coverage: All aspects of the protocol are implemented.
Licensing: GNU Lesser General Public License
Contact: quoc-anh.np@team.neustar
URL: http://registrytoolkit.neustar
6.3. Neustar gTLD SRS
Organisation: Neustar Inc.
Name: Neustar generic Top Level Domain (gTLD) Shared Registry System
(SRS).
Description: The Neustar gTLD SRS implements the server side of
draft-ietf-regext-allocation-token for several Top Level Domains.
Level of maturity: Production
Coverage: All server side aspects of the protocol are implemented.
Licensing: Proprietary
Contact: quoc-anh.np@team.neustar
6.4. Net::DRI
Organization: Dot and Co
Name: Net::DRI
Description: Net::DRI implements the client-side of draft-ietf-
regext-allocation-token.
Level of maturity: Production
Coverage: All client-side aspects of the protocol are implemented.
Licensing: GNU Lesser General Public License
Contact: netdri@dotandco.com
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
7. Security Considerations
The mapping described in this document does not provide any security
services beyond those described by EPP [RFC5730] and protocol layers
used by EPP. The security considerations described in these other
specifications apply to this specification as well.
The mapping acts as a conduit for the passing of Allocation Tokens
between a client and a server. The definition of the Allocation
Token SHOULD be defined outside of this mapping. The following are
security considerations in the definition and use of an Allocation
Token:
1. An Allocation Token should be considered secret information by
the client and SHOULD be protected at rest and MUST be protected
in transit.
2. An Allocation Token should be single use, meaning it should be
unique per object and per allocation operation.
3. An Allocation Token should have a limited life with some form of
expiry in the Allocation Token if generated by a trusted 3rd
third party, or with a server-side expiry if generated by the
server.
4. An Allocation Token should use a strong random value if it is
based on an unsigned code.
5. An Allocation Token should leverage digital signatures to confirm
its authenticity if generated by a trusted 3rd party.
6. An Allocation Token that is signed XML should be encoded (e.g.,
base64 [RFC4648]) to mitigate server validation issues.
8. Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge the original concept for this draft
and the efforts in the initial versions of this draft by Trung Tran
and Sharon Wodjenski.
Special suggestions that have been incorporated into this document
were provided by Ben Campbell, Scott Hollenbeck, Benjamin Kaduk,
Mirja Kuehlewind, Rubens Kuhl, Alexander Mayrhofer, Patrick Mevzek,
Eric Rescoria, and Adam Roach.
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[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>.
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.
[RFC5730] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)",
STD 69, RFC 5730, DOI 10.17487/RFC5730, August 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5730>.
[RFC5731] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
Domain Name Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5731,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5731, August 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5731>.
[RFC7942] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running
Code: The Implementation Status Section", BCP 205,
RFC 7942, DOI 10.17487/RFC7942, July 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7942>.
9.2. Informative References
[RFC4648] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data
Encodings", RFC 4648, DOI 10.17487/RFC4648, October 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4648>.
[RFC7451] Hollenbeck, S., "Extension Registry for the Extensible
Provisioning Protocol", RFC 7451, DOI 10.17487/RFC7451,
February 2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7451>.
[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>.
Appendix A. Change History
A.1. Change from 00 to 01
1. Amended XML Namespace section of IANA Considerations, added EPP
Extension Registry section.
2. Moved Change History to the back section as an Appendix.
A.2. Change from 01 to 02
1. Ping update.
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
A.3. Change from 02 to 03
1. Ping update.
A.4. Change from 03 to 04
1. Updated the authors for the draft.
A.5. Change from 04 to REGEXT 00
1. Changed to regext working group draft by changing draft-gould-
allocation-token to draft-ietf-regext-allocation-token.
A.6. Change from REGEXT 00 to REGEXT 01
1. Ping update.
A.7. Change from REGEXT 01 to REGEXT 02
1. Added the Implementation Status section.
A.8. Change from REGEXT 02 to REGEXT 03
1. Changed Neustar author to Kal Feher.
A.9. Change from REGEXT 03 to REGEXT 04
1. Added Neustar implementation to the Implementation Status
section.
A.10. Change from REGEXT 04 to REGEXT 05
1. Updates based on feedback from Patrick Mevzek, that include:
1. Remove "or code" from the Abstract section.
2. Add a missing "to" in "an allocation token TO one of the
EPP..." in the Introduction section.
3. Reword the "The allocation token is known to the server..."
sentence in the Introduction section.
4. Modify the "The allocation token MAY be returned to an
authorized client for passing out-of-band to a client that
uses it with an EPP transform command" to clarify who the two
separate clients are.
5. Removed an unneeded ":" from the EPP <transfer> Command and
EPP <update> Command sections.
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
A.11. Change from REGEXT 05 to REGEXT 06
1. Fix description of Neustar gTLD SRS based on feedback from Rubens
Kuhl.
2. Updates based on feedback from Alexander Mayrhofer, that include:
1. Making all references to Allocation Token to use the upper
case form.
2. Revise the language of the abstract to include "for
including an Allocation Token in query and transform
commands. The Allocation Token is used as a credential that
authorizes a client to request the allocation of a specific
object from the server, using one of the EPP transform
commands..."
3. Replace the title "EPP <transfer> Command" with "EPP
<transfer> Query Command" for section 3.1.3.
4. Revise the second sentence of the Introduction to "The
mapping, ..., supports passing an Allocation Token..."
5. Change "support" to "require" in the Introduction sentence
"It is up to server policy which EPP transform commands and
which objects support the Allocation Token."
6. Add the definition of Allocation to the Introduction.
7. Removed "transform" from "all of the supported EPP transform
commands" in the "Allocation Token" section, since the
Allocation Token can be used with the "check" command as
well.
8. Remove the word "same" from "The same
<allocationToken:allocationToken> element is used for
all..." in the "Allocation Token" section.
9. Change the description of the use of the 2201 error in the
"Allocation Token" section, the "EPP <create> Command"
section, the "EPP <transfer> Command" section, and the "EPP
<update> Command" section.
10. Revise "<check> to determine if an object is known to the
server..." to "<check> to determine if an object can be
provisioned..." and remove "detailed" in the description of
the <info> in the "EPP Query Commands" section.
11. Add missing description of the expected <check> response
behavior.
12. Replaced the example reason "Invalid domain-token pair" with
"Allocation Token mismatch".
13. Replace "information on" with "information associated with"
in the "EPP <info> Command" section.
14. Removed the "that identifies the extension namespace", the
", defined in...", the Allocation Token links from the error
response sentences, and the "object referencing the
<allocationToken:info> element" in the "EPP <info> Command"
section.
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
15. Added "The authorization is subject to server policy." to
the "EPP <info> Command" section.
16. Replace "or <transfer> response>" with "or <transfer> query
response>" in the EPP <transfer> Query Command" section.
17. Replace "create an object" with "create an instance of an
object" in the "EPP <create> Command" section.
18. Revised the sentence to include "the command MUST contain a
child <allocationToken:allocationToken> element for the
client to be authorized to create and allocate the object"
in the "EPP <create> Command" section.
19. Removed the reference to section 2.1 and the namespace
identification text in the "EPP <transfer> Command" section.
20. Added "The authorization associated with the Allocation
Token is in addition to and does not replace the
authorization mechanism defined for the object's <transfer>
request command." to the "EPP <transfer> Command" section.
21. Modified the first sentence of the "EPP Extension Registry"
section to read "The following registration of the EPP
Extension Registry, described in RFC7451, is requested"
22. Removed support with using the Allocation Token with an
empty extension of update (e.g., release command), based on
the confusion and lack of known applicability.
3. Updates based on feedback from Scott Hollenbeck, that include:
1. Revised XML schema to included a minimum length of 1 for the
allocationTokenType.
2. Revised the "IANA Considerations" section to include the
registration of the XML schema.
3. Revised the "Security Considerations" section to include
considerations for the definition of the Allocation Tokens.
A.12. Change from REGEXT 06 to REGEXT 07
1. Updates based on feedback from Patrick Mevzek:
1. Updated obsoleted RFC 7942 to RFC 7942.
2. Moved RFC 7451 to an informational reference.
A.13. Change from REGEXT 07 to REGEXT 08
1. Changed Kal Feher's contact e-mail address.
2. Changed Neustar's Implementation Status contact e-mail address.
3. Added the Net::DRI sub-section to the Implementation Status
section.
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
A.14. Change from REGEXT 08 to REGEXT 09
1. Updates based on the AD review by Adam Roach, that include:
1. In "Abstract", set "query" and "transform" off in some way
(e.g., using quotation marks)
2. In "Conventions Used in This Document", please update to use
the boilerplate from RFC 8174.
3. Remove "allocationToken-1.0" is used as an abbreviation for
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0".
4. In "Allocation Token", change "The server MUST have the
Allocation Token" to "The server MAY have the Allocation
Token".
5. In "EPP <check> Command", change "This extension allow
clients" to "This extension allows clients".
6. Use domains reserved by RFC 2026 for the examples. The
example domain "example.tld" was changed to
"allocation.example" and the example domain "example2.tld"
was changed to "allocation2.example".
7. In "EPP <info> Command", change "...the server MUST return
an EPP error result code of 2303 object referencing the
<allocationToken:info> element." to "...the server MUST
return an EPP error result code of 2303."
8. In "EPP <transfer> Query Command", remove "the" before
"RFC5730".
9. In "EPP <transfer> Command", change "If the Allocation Token
does not apply to the object..." to "If the Allocation Token
is invalid or not required for the object...".
10. In "XML Namespace", remove the sentence "The following URI
assignment is requested of IANA:"
11. In "Security Considerations", change "An Allocation Token
should is" to "An Allocation Token that is". Also
informatively cite RFC 4648 for the base64 reference.
2. Change "ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0" to
"ietf:params:xml:schema:allocationToken-1.0" for the XML schema
IANA registration.
A.15. Change from REGEXT 09 to REGEXT 10
1. Changed "auhorization" to "authorization" in the "EPP <info>
Command" section.
2. Added 'If an object does not require an Allocation Token, the
server MAY return the availability status as available (e.g.,
"avail" attribute is "1" or "true").' to the check response
cases, based on feedback by Mirja Kuehlewind.
3. Changed the definition of the <info> element in the XML schema to
only allow an empty element, based on IANA's expert review.
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
4. Added normative language to the storage and transport of the
Allocation Token, in the "Security Considerations" section, based
on feedback from Eric Rescoria.
5. Changed "The definition of the Allocation Token is defined
outside of this mapping" to "The definition of the Allocation
Token SHOULD be defined outside of this mapping", in the
"Security Considerations" section, based on feedback from Eric
Rescoria.
6. Added the missing "urn:" prefix with the IANA URI registrations.
7. The URL for the BCP 14 was removed based on feedback from Alissa
Cooper.
8. Updates based on review by Benjamin Kaduk, that include:
1. Added the second paragraph to the "Allocation Token" section
to describe the difference (motivation) of using the
Allocation Token versus the EPP RFC authorization mechanism.
2. Added a paragraph to the "Conventions Used in This Document"
section for the use of the "abc123" token value and the use
of domain object "2fooBAR" password value in the examples.
3. Changed the "A client MUST pass an Allocation Token known to
the server to be authorized to use one of the supported EPP
transform commands." sentence in the "Introduction" section
to "Clients pass an Allocation Token to the server for
validation, and the server determines if the supplied
Allocation Token is one supported by the server."
4. Changed the "Indentation and white space in the examples are
provided only to illustrate element relationships and are not
REQUIRED in the protocol." sentence in the "Conventions Used
in This Document" section to "Indentation and white space in
the examples are provided only to illustrate element
relationships and are not REQUIRED in the protocol."
5. Changed the "Authorized clients MAY retrieve..." sentence in
the "EPP <info> Command" section.
6. Changed the "If the query was successful..." sentence in the
"EPP <info> Command" section.
7. Added "supplied" to the "If the supplied Allocation Token
passed..." sentence in the "Allocation Token" section.
8. Removed an extra newline in the <annotation> element in the
"Allocation Token Extension Schema" section.
A.16. Change from REGEXT 10 to REGEXT 11
1. Removed the old duplicate "Authorized clients MAY retrieve..."
sentence from section 3.1.2 "EPP <info> Command".
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft allocationToken October 2018
A.17. Change from REGEXT 11 to REGEXT 12
1. Revised the example <check> domain response to first include the
positive case for allocation.example, and to second include the
negative case for allocation2.example, based on feedback from Ben
Campbell. The caption was revised for the example to include the
text ", where the Allocation Token 'abc123' matches
allocation.example but does not match allocation2.example".
Authors' Addresses
James Gould
VeriSign, Inc.
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190
US
Email: jgould@verisign.com
URI: http://www.verisigninc.com
Kal Feher
Neustar
lvl 8/10 Queens Road
Melbourne, VIC 3004
AU
Email: ietf@feherfamily.org
URI: http://www.neustar.biz
Gould & Feher Expires April 7, 2019 [Page 26]
