doc: Add RFC documents

1 files changed, 551 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc9388.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc9388.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..35e05e4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc9388.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,551 @@
+
+
+
+
+Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                         N. Sopher
+Request for Comments: 9388                                         Qwilt
+Updates: 8008                                                  S. Mishra
+Category: Standards Track                                        Verizon
+ISSN: 2070-1721                                                July 2023
+
+
+Content Delivery Network Interconnection (CDNI) Footprint Types: Country
+                  Subdivision Code and Footprint Union
+
+Abstract
+
+   Open Caching architecture is a use case of Content Delivery Network
+   Interconnection (CDNI) in which the commercial Content Delivery
+   Network (CDN) is the upstream CDN (uCDN) and the ISP caching layer
+   serves as the downstream CDN (dCDN).  RFC 8006 defines footprint
+   types that are used for footprint objects as part of the Metadata
+   interface (MI).  The footprint types are also used for the Footprint
+   & Capabilities Advertisement interface (FCI) as defined in RFC 8008.
+   This document defines two new footprint types.  The first footprint
+   type defined is an ISO 3166-2 country subdivision code.  Defining
+   this country subdivision code improves granularity for delegation as
+   compared to the ISO 3166-1 country code footprint type defined in RFC
+   8006.  The ISO 3166-2 country subdivision code is also added as a new
+   entity domain type in the "ALTO Entity Domain Types" registry defined
+   in Section 7.4 of RFC 9241.  The second footprint type defines a
+   footprint union to aggregate footprint objects.  This allows for
+   additive semantics over the narrowing semantics defined in Appendix B
+   of RFC 8008 and therefore updates RFC 8008.  The two new footprint
+   types are based on the requirements raised by Open Caching but are
+   also applicable to CDNI use cases in general.
+
+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 7841.
+
+   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
+   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
+   https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9388.
+
+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.
+
+Table of Contents
+
+   1.  Introduction
+     1.1.  Terminology
+     1.2.  Requirements Language
+   2.  CDNI Metadata Additional Footprint Types
+     2.1.  CDNI Metadata "subdivisioncode" Footprint Type
+       2.1.1.  CDNI Metadata "subdivisioncode" Data Type
+         2.1.1.1.  CDNI Metadata "subdivisioncode" Data Type
+                 Description
+       2.1.2.  CDNI Metadata "subdivisioncode" Footprint Type
+               Description
+     2.2.  CDNI Metadata "footprintunion" Footprint Type
+       2.2.1.  CDNI Metadata "footprintunion" Data Type
+       2.2.2.  CDNI Metadata "footprintunion" Footprint Type
+               Description
+   3.  ALTO Property Map Service Entity
+     3.1.  SUBDIVISIONCODE Domain
+       3.1.1.  Entity Domain Type
+       3.1.2.  Domain-Specific Entity Identifiers
+       3.1.3.  Hierarchy and Inheritance
+   4.  IANA Considerations
+     4.1.  CDNI Metadata Footprint Types
+     4.2.  ALTO Entity Domain Types
+   5.  Security Considerations
+   6.  References
+     6.1.  Normative References
+     6.2.  Informative References
+   Acknowledgements
+   Authors' Addresses
+
+1.  Introduction
+
+   The Streaming Video Technology Alliance [SVTA] is a global
+   association that works to solve streaming video challenges in an
+   effort to improve end-user experience and adoption.  The Open Caching
+   Working Group [OCWG] of the SVTA is focused on the delegation of
+   video delivery requests from commercial Content Delivery Networks
+   (CDNs) to a caching layer at the ISP's network.  Open Caching
+   architecture is a specific use case of Content Delivery Network
+   Interconnection (CDNI) where the commercial CDN is the upstream CDN
+   (uCDN) and the ISP caching layer is the downstream CDN (dCDN).  The
+   "Open Caching Request Routing Functional Specification" [OC-RR]
+   defines the Request Routing process and the interfaces that are
+   required for its provisioning.  This document defines and registers
+   CDNI Footprint and Capabilities objects [RFC8008] that are required
+   for Open Caching Request Routing.
+
+   For consistency with other CDNI documents, this document follows the
+   CDNI convention of using "uCDN" and "dCDN" to represent the
+   commercial CDN and ISP caching layer, respectively.
+
+   This document registers two CDNI Metadata footprint types
+   (Section 7.2 of [RFC8006]) for the defined objects:
+
+   *  Country subdivision code footprint type (e.g., for a dCDN
+      advertising a footprint that is specific to a state in the United
+      States of America)
+
+   *  Footprint union footprint type (for a dCDN advertising a footprint
+      that consists of a group built from multiple footprint types,
+      e.g., both IPv4 and IPv6 client subnets)
+
+1.1.  Terminology
+
+   The following terms are used throughout this document:
+
+   CDN:  Content Delivery Network
+
+   Additionally, this document reuses the terminology defined in
+   [RFC6707], [RFC7336], [RFC8006], and [RFC8008].  Specifically, we use
+   the following CDNI abbreviations:
+
+   uCDN:  upstream CDN (see [RFC7336])
+
+   dCDN:  downstream CDN (see [RFC7336])
+
+1.2.  Requirements Language
+
+   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.  CDNI Metadata Additional Footprint Types
+
+   Section 5 of [RFC8008] describes the Footprint & Capabilities
+   Advertisement interface (FCI) Capability Advertisement object, which
+   includes an array of CDNI footprint objects.  Each such object has a
+   footprint type and a footprint value, as described in Section 4.2.2.2
+   of [RFC8006].  This document defines additional footprint types,
+   beyond those mentioned in [RFC8006].
+
+2.1.  CDNI Metadata "subdivisioncode" Footprint Type
+
+   Section 4.3.8 of [RFC8006] specifies the "countrycode" footprint type
+   for listing [ISO3166-1] alpha-2 codes.  Using footprint objects of
+   this type, one can define an FCI Capability Advertisement object
+   footprint constraint that matches a specific country.  This document
+   defines the "subdivisioncode" simple data type as well as a footprint
+   type, allowing the dCDN to define constraints that match geographic
+   areas with better granularity, specifically using the [ISO3166-2]
+   country subdivision codes.
+
+2.1.1.  CDNI Metadata "subdivisioncode" Data Type
+
+   The "subdivisioncode" data type specified in Section 2.1.1.1
+   describes a country-specific subdivision using a code as defined in
+   [ISO3166-2].  The data type is added to the list of data types
+   described in Section 4.3 of [RFC8006] that are used as properties of
+   CDNI Metadata objects.
+
+2.1.1.1.  CDNI Metadata "subdivisioncode" Data Type Description
+
+   An [ISO3166-2] code in lowercase.  Each code consists of two parts
+   separated by a hyphen.  As per [ISO3166-2], the first part is the
+   [ISO3166-1] code of the country and the second part is a string of up
+   to three alphanumeric characters.
+
+   Type:  String
+
+   Example country subdivision codes:
+      *  "ca-on"
+
+      *  "us-ny"
+
+2.1.2.  CDNI Metadata "subdivisioncode" Footprint Type Description
+
+   The "subdivisioncode" simple data type specified in Section 2.1.1 is
+   added to the data types listed as footprint types in Section 4.2.2.2
+   of [RFC8006].
+
+   Figure 1 is an example using a footprint object of type
+   "subdivisioncode".  The footprint object in this example creates a
+   constraint that matches clients in the state of either New Jersey or
+   New York, USA (ISO [ISO3166-2] codes "US-NJ" and "US-NY",
+   respectively).
+
+   {
+     "capabilities": [
+       {
+         "capability-type": <CDNI capability object type>,
+         "capability-value": <CDNI capability object>,
+         "footprints": [
+             {
+                 "footprint-type": "subdivisioncode",
+                 "footprint-value": ["us-nj", "us-ny"]
+             }
+         ]
+       }
+     ]
+   }
+
+        Figure 1: Illustration of Country Subdivision Code Footprint
+                               Advertisement
+
+2.2.  CDNI Metadata "footprintunion" Footprint Type
+
+   As described in Section 5 of [RFC8008], the FCI Capability
+   Advertisement object includes an array of CDNI footprint objects.
+   Appendix B of [RFC8008] specifies the semantics for Footprint
+   Advertisement such that multiple footprint constraints are additive.
+   This implies that the advertisement of different footprint types
+   narrows the dCDN's candidacy cumulatively.
+
+   Sections 4.3.5 and 4.3.6 of [RFC8006] specify the "ipv4cidr" and the
+   "ipv6cidr" footprint types, respectively, for listing IP unscoped
+   address blocks.  Using footprint objects of these types, one can
+   define FCI Capability Advertisement object footprint constraints that
+   match either IPv4 or IPv6 clients, but not both.  This is due to the
+   described "narrowing" semantic of the Footprint Objects array, as
+   described in Appendix B of [RFC8008], that prevents the usage of
+   these objects together to create a footprint constraint that matches
+   IPv4 clients with IPv6 clients.
+
+   Figure 2 is an example attempting to create an object that matches
+   IPv4 clients of subnet "192.0.2.0/24" as well as IPv6 clients of
+   subnet "2001:db8::/32".  Such a definition results in an empty list
+   of clients, as the constraints are additives and a client address
+   cannot be both IPv4 and IPv6.
+
+   {
+     "capabilities": [
+       {
+         "capability-type": <CDNI capability object type>,
+         "capability-value": <CDNI capability object>,
+         "footprints": [
+             {
+                 "footprint-type": "ipv4cidr",
+                 "footprint-value": ["192.0.2.0/24"]
+             },
+             {
+                 "footprint-type": "ipv6cidr",
+                 "footprint-value": ["2001:db8::/32"]
+             }
+         ]
+       }
+     ]
+   }
+
+            Figure 2: Example of Narrowing Semantic Illustrating
+                     Advertisement of a Null Footprint
+
+   To overcome the described limitation and allow a list of footprint
+   constraints that match both IPv4 and IPv6 client subnets, this
+   document defines the "footprintunion" footprint type.  This footprint
+   type allows the collection of multiple footprint-objects into a
+   unified object.  Therefore, it resolves the above limitation and can
+   be particularly applicable to unify semantically related objects: for
+   example, an IPv4 CIDR together with an IPv6 CIDR or a country code
+   together with a country subdivision code.
+
+   Note: to avoid implementation complexity, a "footprintunion" MUST NOT
+   list any "footprintunion" as a value.  As a union of unions is simply
+   a union, this syntactic restriction does not result with any semantic
+   limitation.
+
+2.2.1.  CDNI Metadata "footprintunion" Data Type
+
+   The "footprintunion" data type is based on the footprint object
+   already defined in Section 4.2.2.2 of [RFC8006].  The footprint value
+   for a "footprintunion" object is an array of footprint objects, where
+   the footprint objects MUST be of any footprint type other than
+   "footprintunion".
+
+2.2.2.  CDNI Metadata "footprintunion" Footprint Type Description
+
+   The "footprintunion" data type specified in Section 2.2.1 is added to
+   the data types listed as footprint types in Section 4.2.2.2 of
+   [RFC8006].
+
+   Figure 3 is an example using a footprint union combining both IPv4
+   and IPv6 client subnets.
+
+   {
+     "capabilities": [
+       {
+         "capability-type": <CDNI capability object type>,
+         "capability-value": <CDNI capability object>,
+         "footprints": [
+           {
+             "footprint-type": "footprintunion",
+             "footprint-value": [
+               {
+                 "footprint-type": "ipv4cidr",
+                 "footprint-value": ["192.0.2.0/24"]
+               },
+               {
+                 "footprint-type": "ipv6cidr",
+                 "footprint-value": ["2001:db8::/32"]
+               }
+             ]
+           }
+         ]
+       }
+     ]
+   }
+
+        Figure 3: Example of an Advertisement of Footprint Union for
+       Multiple Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) Footprint Types
+
+   The footprint union also enables composing of footprint objects based
+   on the country code and country subdivision code.  In Figure 4, we
+   create a constraint covering autonomous system 64496 within the USA
+   (ISO alpha-2 code "US" as described in [ISO3166-1]) and the Ontario
+   province of Canada (ISO code "CA-ON" as described in [ISO3166-2]).
+
+   {
+     "capabilities": [
+       {
+         "capability-type": <CDNI capability object type>,
+         "capability-value": <CDNI capability object>,
+         "footprints": [
+           {
+             "footprint-type": "asn",
+             "footprint-value": ["as64496"]
+           },
+           {
+             "footprint-type": "footprintunion",
+             "footprint-value": [
+               {
+                 "footprint-type": "countrycode",
+                 "footprint-value": ["us"]
+               },
+               {
+                 "footprint-type": "subdivisioncode",
+                 "footprint-value": ["ca-on"]
+               }
+             ]
+           }
+         ]
+       }
+     ]
+   }
+
+   Figure 4: Example of an Advertisement of Footprint Union for Multiple
+                        Geographical Footprint Types
+
+3.  ALTO Property Map Service Entity
+
+   Section 6 of [RFC9241] describes how to represent footprint objects
+   as entities in the ALTO property map.  The approach is to represent
+   the footprint type as an entity domain type of the ALTO entity and
+   the footprint value as its domain-specific identifier.  [RFC9241]
+   further refers to the representation of footprint objects of types
+   "asn" and "countrycode".  Here, we extend this definition to the
+   "subdivisioncode" footprint type.
+
+3.1.  SUBDIVISIONCODE Domain
+
+   The SUBDIVISIONCODE domain associates property values that define
+   codes for the names of the principal subdivisions.
+
+3.1.1.  Entity Domain Type
+
+   The entity domain type of the SUBDIVISIONCODE domain is
+   "subdivisioncode" (in lowercase).
+
+3.1.2.  Domain-Specific Entity Identifiers
+
+   The entity identifier of an entity in a SUBDIVISIONCODE is encoded as
+   an alpha-2 [ISO3166-1] country code, followed by a separator and up
+   to three alphanumeric characters.
+
+3.1.3.  Hierarchy and Inheritance
+
+   There is no hierarchy or inheritance for properties associated with
+   country subdivision codes.
+
+4.  IANA Considerations
+
+4.1.  CDNI Metadata Footprint Types
+
+   Section 7.2 of [RFC8006] specifies the "CDNI Metadata Footprint
+   Types" subregistry within the "Content Delivery Network
+   Interconnection (CDNI) Parameters" registry.
+
+   This document registers two footprint types in that subregistry as
+   defined in Sections 2.1 and 2.2:
+
+     +=================+=================================+===========+
+     | Footprint Type  | Description                     | Reference |
+     +=================+=================================+===========+
+     | subdivisioncode | ISO 3166-2 country subdivision  | RFC 9388  |
+     |                 | code: alpha-2 country code,     |           |
+     |                 | followed by a hyphen-minus and  |           |
+     |                 | up to 3 characters from A-Z;0-9 |           |
+     |                 | as a code within the country    |           |
+     +-----------------+---------------------------------+-----------+
+     | footprintunion  | A combination of other          | RFC 9388  |
+     |                 | footprint objects               |           |
+     +-----------------+---------------------------------+-----------+
+
+          Table 1: Additions to the CDNI Metadata Footprint Types
+                                Subregistry
+
+4.2.  ALTO Entity Domain Types
+
+   Section 12.3 of [RFC9240] creates the "ALTO Entity Domain Types"
+   subregistry within the "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO)
+   Protocol" registry.
+
+   This document registers an additional ALTO Entity Domain Type within
+   that subregistry:
+
+    +=================+============+=============+==========+=========+
+    | Identifier      | Entity     | Hierarchy   | Media    | Mapping |
+    |                 | Identifier | and         | Type of  | to ALTO |
+    |                 | Encoding   | Inheritance | Defining | Address |
+    |                 |            |             | Resource | Type    |
+    +=================+============+=============+==========+=========+
+    | subdivisioncode | See RFC    | None        | None     | false   |
+    |                 | 9388,      |             |          |         |
+    |                 | Section    |             |          |         |
+    |                 | 3.1.2      |             |          |         |
+    +-----------------+------------+-------------+----------+---------+
+
+       Table 2: Addition to the ALTO Entity Domain Types Subregistry
+
+5.  Security Considerations
+
+   This specification is in accordance with "Content Delivery Network
+   Interconnection (CDNI) Metadata" and "Content Delivery Network
+   Interconnection (CDNI) Request Routing: Footprint and Capabilities
+   Semantics".  As such, it is subject to the security and
+   confidentiality considerations as defined in Section 8 of [RFC8006]
+   and in Section 7 of [RFC8008], respectively.
+
+6.  References
+
+6.1.  Normative References
+
+   [ISO3166-1]
+              ISO, "Codes for the representation of names of countries
+              and their subdivisions -- Part 1: Country code",
+              ISO 3166-1:2020, Edition 4, August 2020,
+              <https://www.iso.org/standard/72482.html>.
+
+   [ISO3166-2]
+              ISO, "Codes for the representation of names of countries
+              and their subdivisions -- Part 2: Country subdivision
+              code", ISO 3166-2:2020, Edition 4, August 2020,
+              <https://www.iso.org/standard/72483.html>.
+
+   [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>.
+
+   [RFC8006]  Niven-Jenkins, B., Murray, R., Caulfield, M., and K. Ma,
+              "Content Delivery Network Interconnection (CDNI)
+              Metadata", RFC 8006, DOI 10.17487/RFC8006, December 2016,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8006>.
+
+   [RFC8008]  Seedorf, J., Peterson, J., Previdi, S., van Brandenburg,
+              R., and K. Ma, "Content Delivery Network Interconnection
+              (CDNI) Request Routing: Footprint and Capabilities
+              Semantics", RFC 8008, DOI 10.17487/RFC8008, December 2016,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8008>.
+
+   [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>.
+
+   [RFC9240]  Roome, W., Randriamasy, S., Yang, Y., Zhang, J., and K.
+              Gao, "An Extension for Application-Layer Traffic
+              Optimization (ALTO): Entity Property Maps", RFC 9240,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC9240, July 2022,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9240>.
+
+   [RFC9241]  Seedorf, J., Yang, Y., Ma, K., Peterson, J., and J. Zhang,
+              "Content Delivery Network Interconnection (CDNI) Footprint
+              and Capabilities Advertisement Using Application-Layer
+              Traffic Optimization (ALTO)", RFC 9241,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC9241, July 2022,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9241>.
+
+6.2.  Informative References
+
+   [OC-RR]    Finkelman, O., Ed., Zurat, B., Sahar, D., Klein, E.,
+              Hofmann, J., Ma, K.J., Stock, M., Mishra, S., and Y.
+              Gressel, "Open Caching - Request Routing Functional
+              Specification", Version 2.0, 15 January 2021,
+              <https://www.svta.org/product/open-cache-request-routing-
+              functional-specification/>.
+
+   [OCWG]     SVTA, "Open Caching", <https://opencaching.svta.org/>.
+
+   [RFC6707]  Niven-Jenkins, B., Le Faucheur, F., and N. Bitar, "Content
+              Distribution Network Interconnection (CDNI) Problem
+              Statement", RFC 6707, DOI 10.17487/RFC6707, September
+              2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6707>.
+
+   [RFC7336]  Peterson, L., Davie, B., and R. van Brandenburg, Ed.,
+              "Framework for Content Distribution Network
+              Interconnection (CDNI)", RFC 7336, DOI 10.17487/RFC7336,
+              August 2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7336>.
+
+   [SVTA]     SVTA, "Streaming Video Technology Alliance",
+              <https://www.svta.org/>.
+
+Acknowledgements
+
+   The authors would like to express their gratitude to Ori Finkelman
+   and Kevin J. Ma for their guidance and reviews throughout the
+   development of this document.  We would also like to thank all the
+   Area Directors for their review and feedback in improving this
+   document.
+
+Authors' Addresses
+
+   Nir B. Sopher
+   Qwilt
+   6, Ha'harash
+   Hod HaSharon 4524079
+   Israel
+   Email: nir@apache.org
+
+
+   Sanjay Mishra
+   Verizon
+   13100 Columbia Pike
+   Silver Spring, MD 20904
+   United States of America
+   Email: sanjay.mishra@verizon.com