doc: Add RFC documents

1 files changed, 395 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc7718.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc7718.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3170ed7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc7718.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,395 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                         A. Morton
+Request for Comments: 7718                                     AT&T Labs
+Updates: 4656                                              December 2015
+Category: Standards Track
+ISSN: 2070-1721
+
+
+     Registries for the One-Way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP)
+
+Abstract
+
+   This memo describes the registries for OWAMP -- the One-Way Active
+   Measurement Protocol.  The registries allow assignment of Mode bit
+   positions and OWAMP Command numbers.  Per this memo, IANA has
+   established the registries for new features, called the OWAMP-Modes
+   registry and the OWAMP Control Command Number registry.  This memo
+   updates RFC 4656.
+
+Status of This Memo
+
+   This is an Internet Standards Track document.
+
+   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
+   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
+   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
+   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
+   Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
+
+   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
+   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
+   http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7718.
+
+Copyright Notice
+
+   Copyright (c) 2015 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
+   (http://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 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.
+
+
+
+
+
+Morton                       Standards Track                    [Page 1]
+
+RFC 7718                    OWAMP Registries               December 2015
+
+
+Table of Contents
+
+   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
+     1.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
+   2.  Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
+   3.  IANA Considerations for OWAMP-Control Registries  . . . . . .   3
+     3.1.  Control Command Number Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
+       3.1.1.  Registry Specification  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
+       3.1.2.  Registry Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
+       3.1.3.  Experimental Numbers  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
+       3.1.4.  OWAMP-Control Command Numbers Initial Contents  . . .   3
+     3.2.  OWAMP-Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
+       3.2.1.  Registry Specification  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
+       3.2.2.  Registry Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
+       3.2.3.  Experimental Numbers  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
+       3.2.4.  OWAMP-Modes Initial Contents  . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
+   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
+   5.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
+     5.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
+     5.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
+   Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
+   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
+
+1.  Introduction
+
+   The One-Way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP) [RFC4656] was
+   prepared to support measurements of metrics specified by the IP
+   Performance Metrics (IPPM) working group in the IETF.  The Two-Way
+   Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP) [RFC5357] is an extension of
+   OWAMP.  The TWAMP specification gathered wide review as it approached
+   completion, and the by-products were several recommendations for new
+   features in TWAMP.  As a result, a registry of new features was
+   established for TWAMP.  However, there were no new features proposed
+   for OWAMP until recently [RFC7717].
+
+   This memo establishes the needed registries for OWAMP and updates
+   [RFC4656].
+
+1.1.  Requirements Language
+
+   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
+   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
+   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Morton                       Standards Track                    [Page 2]
+
+RFC 7718                    OWAMP Registries               December 2015
+
+
+2.  Purpose and Scope
+
+   The purpose and scope of this memo is to describe and request the
+   establishment of registries for future OWAMP [RFC4656] extensions.
+   IANA already administers the "Two-way Active Measurement Protocol
+   (TWAMP) Parameters", and this request follows a similar form (with
+   one exception identified below).
+
+   This memo also provides the initial contents for the OWAMP
+   registries.
+
+3.  IANA Considerations for OWAMP-Control Registries
+
+   The OWAMP-Control protocol coordinates the measurement capability.
+   All OWAMP-Control messages follow specifications defined in Section 3
+   of [RFC4656].
+
+3.1.  Control Command Number Registry
+
+   IANA has created an OWAMP-Control Command Number registry.
+
+   OWAMP-Control Commands follow specifications defined in Section 3.4
+   of [RFC4656].
+
+3.1.1.  Registry Specification
+
+   OWAMP-Control Command Numbers are specified in the first octet of
+   OWAMP-Control-Client command messages consistent with Section 3 of
+   [RFC4656].  There are a maximum of 256 command numbers.
+
+3.1.2.  Registry Management
+
+   Because the "OWAMP-Control Command Numbers" registry can contain only
+   256 values, and because OWAMP is an IETF protocol, these registries
+   MUST be updated only by "IETF Review" as specified in [RFC5226] (an
+   RFC that documents registry use and is approved by the IESG).
+
+3.1.3.  Experimental Numbers
+
+   One experimental value is currently assigned in the Command Numbers
+   Registry, as indicated in the initial contents below.
+
+3.1.4.  OWAMP-Control Command Numbers Initial Contents
+
+   OWAMP-Control Commands follows the procedure defined in Section 3.5
+   of [RFC4656] and in the remainder of Section 3 of that document.
+
+
+
+
+
+Morton                       Standards Track                    [Page 3]
+
+RFC 7718                    OWAMP Registries               December 2015
+
+
+   The complete set of OWAMP-Control Command Numbers are as follows
+   (including two reserved values):
+
+      OWAMP-Control Command Numbers
+
+      Value   Description             Semantics     Reference
+                                      Definition
+   ==========================================================
+       0      Reserved                Section 3.1.4 RFC 7718
+       1      Request-Session         Section 3.5   RFC 4656
+       2      Start-Sessions          Section 3.7   RFC 4656
+       3      Stop-Sessions           Section 3.8   RFC 4656
+       4      Fetch-Sessions          Section 3.9   RFC 4656
+       5-253  Unassigned
+       254    Experimentation         Section 3.1.4 RFC 7718
+       255    Reserved                Section 3.1.4 RFC 7718
+
+3.2.  OWAMP-Modes
+
+   IANA has created an OWAMP-Modes registry.
+
+3.2.1.  Registry Specification
+
+   OWAMP-Modes are specified in OWAMP Server Greeting messages and Set-
+   up Response messages consistent with Section 3.1 of [RFC4656].  Modes
+   are currently indicated by setting single bits in the 32-bit Modes
+   field.  However, more complex encoding may be used in the future.
+
+3.2.2.  Registry Management
+
+   Because the "OWAMP-Modes" are based on only 32 bit positions with
+   each position conveying a unique feature, and because OWAMP is an
+   IETF protocol, these registries MUST be updated only by "IETF Review"
+   as specified in [RFC5226] (an RFC that documents registry use and is
+   approved by the IESG).  IANA SHOULD allocate monotonically increasing
+   bit positions when requested.
+
+3.2.3.  Experimental Numbers
+
+   No experimental bit positions are currently assigned in the Modes
+   registry, as indicated in the initial contents below.
+
+3.2.4.  OWAMP-Modes Initial Contents
+
+   OWAMP-Control connection establishment follows the procedure defined
+   in Section 3.1 of [RFC4656].
+
+
+
+
+
+Morton                       Standards Track                    [Page 4]
+
+RFC 7718                    OWAMP Registries               December 2015
+
+
+   In the OWAMP-Modes registry, assignments are straightforward on the
+   basis of bit positions, and there are no references to values -- this
+   is a difference from the comparable TWAMP registry (and a topic for
+   improvement in the TWAMP-Modes registry that is reconciled in
+   [RFC7717]).
+
+   An extension of the OWAMP-Modes is proposed in [RFC7717].  With this
+   extension, the complete set of OWAMP Mode bit positions are as
+   follows (including one reserved bit position):
+
+   OWAMP-Modes
+
+   Bit                            Semantics
+   Pos.   Description             Definition     Reference
+   =======================================================
+   0      Unauthenticated         Section 3.1    RFC 4656
+   1      Authenticated           Section 3.1    RFC 4656
+   2      Encrypted               Section 3.1    RFC 4656
+   3      Reserved                Section 3.2.4  RFC 7718
+   ------------------------------------------------------
+   4      IKEv2-derived Shared    Section 3.2.4  RFC 7718
+          Secret Key               of RFC 7718,
+                                  Section 5 of   RFC 7717
+                                   of RFC 7717
+   ------------------------------------------------------
+   5-31   Unassigned
+
+   In the original OWAMP Modes field, setting bit position 0, 1, or 2
+   indicated the security mode of the Control protocol, and the Test
+   protocol inherited the same mode (see Section 4 of [RFC4656]).
+
+   The value of the Modes field sent by the Server in the Server-
+   Greeting message is the bit-wise OR of the modes (bit positions) that
+   it is willing to support during this session.  Thus, the five least
+   significant bits of the 32-bit Modes field are used.  When no other
+   features are activated, the 27 most significant bits MUST be zero.  A
+   Control-Client conforming to [RFC4656] MAY ignore the values in the
+   29 most significant bits of the Modes field, or it MAY support
+   features that are communicated in other bit positions, such as the
+   IKEv2-derived Shared Secret Key extension [RFC7717].
+
+   OWAMP and TWAMP registries for Modes may grow to contain different
+   features and functions due to the inherent differences in one-way and
+   two-way measurement configurations and the metrics they measure.  No
+   attempt will be made to coordinate them unnecessarily, except for the
+   Reserved bit position 3 above.  This is available for assignment if a
+   mixed security mode similar to [RFC5618] is defined for OWAMP; it
+   would allow alignment with the comparable TWAMP feature.
+
+
+
+Morton                       Standards Track                    [Page 5]
+
+RFC 7718                    OWAMP Registries               December 2015
+
+
+4.  Security Considerations
+
+   As this memo simply documents the creation of OWAMP registries, it
+   presents no new security or privacy issues for the Internet.
+
+   The security considerations that apply to any active measurement of
+   live networks are relevant here as well.  See [RFC4656] and
+   [RFC5357].
+
+   Privacy considerations for measurement systems, particularly when
+   Internet users participate in the tests in some way, are described in
+   [RFC7594].
+
+5.  References
+
+5.1.  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,
+              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
+
+   [RFC4656]  Shalunov, S., Teitelbaum, B., Karp, A., Boote, J., and M.
+              Zekauskas, "A One-way Active Measurement Protocol
+              (OWAMP)", RFC 4656, DOI 10.17487/RFC4656, September 2006,
+              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4656>.
+
+   [RFC5226]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
+              IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
+              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
+
+   [RFC5357]  Hedayat, K., Krzanowski, R., Morton, A., Yum, K., and J.
+              Babiarz, "A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)",
+              RFC 5357, DOI 10.17487/RFC5357, October 2008,
+              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5357>.
+
+5.2.  Informative References
+
+   [RFC5618]  Morton, A. and K. Hedayat, "Mixed Security Mode for the
+              Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)", RFC 5618,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC5618, August 2009,
+              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5618>.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Morton                       Standards Track                    [Page 6]
+
+RFC 7718                    OWAMP Registries               December 2015
+
+
+   [RFC7594]  Eardley, P., Morton, A., Bagnulo, M., Burbridge, T.,
+              Aitken, P., and A. Akhter, "A Framework for Large-Scale
+              Measurement of Broadband Performance (LMAP)", RFC 7594,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC7594, September 2015,
+              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7594>.
+
+   [RFC7717]  Pentikousis, K., Ed., Zhang, E., and Y. Cui,
+              "IKEv2-Derived Shared Secret Key for the One-Way Active
+              Measurement Protocol (OWAMP) and Two-Way Active
+              Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)", RFC 7717,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC7717, December 2015,
+              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7717>.
+
+Acknowledgements
+
+   The author would like to thank Kostas Pentikousis, Nalini Elkins,
+   Mike Ackermann, and Greg Mirsky for insightful reviews and comments.
+   We thought Spencer Dawkins caught the last of the small errors in his
+   AD review, but Nevil Brownlee found a few more during OPS-DIR review.
+   Roni Even found our use of "IETF Consensus" was out of date with
+   [RFC5226].  Michelle Cotton helped to clarify the IANA
+   considerations.
+
+Author's Address
+
+   Al Morton
+   AT&T Labs
+   200 Laurel Avenue South
+   Middletown,, NJ  07748
+   United States
+
+   Phone: +1 732 420 1571
+   Fax:   +1 732 368 1192
+   Email: acmorton@att.com
+   URI:   http://home.comcast.net/~acmacm/
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Morton                       Standards Track                    [Page 7]
+