idnits 2.17.00 (12 Aug 2021) /tmp/idnits19767/draft-przygienda-rift-kv-registry-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack an Introduction section. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (December 13, 2020) is 517 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Outdated reference: A later version (-15) exists of draft-ietf-rift-rift-12 Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group A. Przygienda 3 Internet-Draft Juniper 4 Intended status: Standards Track December 13, 2020 5 Expires: June 16, 2021 7 RIFT Keys Structure and Well-Known Registry in Key Value TIE 8 draft-przygienda-rift-kv-registry-00 10 Abstract 12 This document describes key structure of keys contained within RIFT 13 key-value TIEs. 15 Requirements Language 17 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 18 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 19 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 21 Status of This Memo 23 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 24 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 26 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 27 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 28 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 29 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 31 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 32 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 33 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 34 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 36 This Internet-Draft will expire on June 16, 2021. 38 Copyright Notice 40 Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 41 document authors. All rights reserved. 43 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 44 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 45 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 46 publication of this document. Please review these documents 47 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 48 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 49 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 50 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 51 described in the Simplified BSD License. 53 Table of Contents 55 1. Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 56 2. Key Type Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 57 3. OUI Key Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 58 4. Well-Known Key Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 59 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 60 5.1. Key Type Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 61 5.1.1. Requested Entries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 62 5.2. Well-Known Key Type Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 63 5.2.1. Requested Entries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 64 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 65 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 66 8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 67 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 69 1. Description 71 [I-D.ietf-rift-rift] specifies a topology information element (TIE) 72 that can carry unstructured key value pairs of data. This document 73 defines a registry for the keys to allow for vendor specific values 74 being carried without risking a collision with future standardized 75 values. 77 This document specifies also several well-known keys and their values 78 including a registry to allow for easier interoperability between 79 implementations. 81 2. Key Type Registry 83 The first octet of every key is a value from a "RIFT Key Types 84 Registry" which may specify the according key structure further. 86 3. OUI Key Type 88 This section reserves a key type value to indicate a vendor specific 89 key with further indication via Organizationally Unique Identifier 90 (OUI) which organization the key belongs to. The value of that first 91 octet is TBD1. The structure of the key is indicated in the figure 92 Figure 1. 94 0 1 2 3 95 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 96 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 97 | TBD1 | Organizationally Unique Identifier | 98 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 99 | Vendor Specific Key Part ... 101 Figure 1: OUI Key 103 4. Well-Known Key Type 105 This section reserves a key type value in Key Type Registry to 106 indicate a well-known key that all implementations SHOULD support. 107 The type is followed by a 3 octets value from a "RIFT Well-Known Key" 108 Registry describing the structure of the value it carries. The 109 resulting structure of the key is provided in Figure 2. 111 0 1 2 3 112 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 113 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 114 | TBD2 | Well-Known Key Type Identifier | 115 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 117 Figure 2: Well-Known Key 119 5. IANA Considerations 121 This section requests registries that help govern RIFT key values via 122 usual IANA registry procedures. All values not suggested as to be 123 considered available for assignment. Allocation of new values is 124 always performed via `Expert Review` action. 126 5.1. Key Type Registry 128 This is registry for key types for keys contained in RIFT KV TIEs. 129 The range of values is 0 .. 255 131 5.1.1. Requested Entries 133 Name Value Description 134 OUI TBD1 Followed by 3 octets of OUI. 135 Well-Known TBD2 Followed by 3 octets value from Well-Known Key 136 Key Type Registry. 138 5.2. Well-Known Key Type Registry 140 This is registry for key types for well-known keys contained in RIFT 141 KV TIEs. The range of values is 0 .. 2^24-1 143 5.2.1. Requested Entries 145 Name Value Description 146 Illegal 0 Not allowed. 147 MAC/IP Binding TBD2 To be defined. 148 FAM Security Roll-Over Key TBD2 To be defined. 150 6. Security Considerations 152 This document introduces no new security concerns to RIFT or other 153 specifications referenced in this document given that key value pairs 154 are carried in TIEs that are already extensively secured by RIFT 155 specification itself. 157 7. Acknowledgements 159 To be provided. 161 8. Normative References 163 [I-D.ietf-rift-rift] 164 Przygienda, T., Sharma, A., Thubert, P., Rijsman, B., and 165 D. Afanasiev, "RIFT: Routing in Fat Trees", draft-ietf- 166 rift-rift-12 (work in progress), May 2020. 168 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 169 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 170 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 171 . 173 Author's Address 175 Tony Przygienda 176 Juniper 177 1137 Innovation Way 179 Sunnyvale, CA 181 USA 183 Email: prz@juniper.net