Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Info page]

PROPOSED STANDARD
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                         A. MortonRequest for Comments: 7718                                     AT&T LabsUpdates:4656                                              December 2015Category: Standards TrackISSN: 2070-1721Registries 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   updatesRFC 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 inSection 2 of RFC 5741.   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained athttp://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 toBCP 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 2015Table of Contents1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22.  Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33.  IANA Considerations for OWAMP-Control Registries  . . . . . .33.1.  Control Command Number Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . .33.1.1.  Registry Specification  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33.1.2.  Registry Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33.1.3.  Experimental Numbers  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33.1.4.  OWAMP-Control Command Numbers Initial Contents  . . .33.2.  OWAMP-Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43.2.1.  Registry Specification  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43.2.2.  Registry Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43.2.3.  Experimental Numbers  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43.2.4.  OWAMP-Modes Initial Contents  . . . . . . . . . . . .44.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6   Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71.  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 inRFC 2119 [RFC2119].Morton                       Standards Track                    [Page 2]

RFC 7718                    OWAMP Registries               December 20152.  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 inSection 3   of [RFC4656].3.1.  Control Command Number Registry   IANA has created an OWAMP-Control Command Number registry.   OWAMP-Control Commands follow specifications defined inSection 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 withSection 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 inSection 3.5   of [RFC4656] and in the remainder ofSection 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      ReservedSection 3.1.4RFC 7718       1      Request-SessionSection 3.5RFC 4656       2      Start-SessionsSection 3.7RFC 4656       3      Stop-SessionsSection 3.8RFC 4656       4      Fetch-SessionsSection 3.9RFC 4656       5-253  Unassigned       254    ExperimentationSection 3.1.4RFC 7718       255    ReservedSection 3.1.4RFC 77183.2.  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 withSection 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   inSection 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      UnauthenticatedSection 3.1RFC 4656   1      AuthenticatedSection 3.1RFC 4656   2      EncryptedSection 3.1RFC 4656   3      ReservedSection 3.2.4RFC 7718   ------------------------------------------------------   4      IKEv2-derived SharedSection 3.2.4RFC 7718          Secret Key               ofRFC 7718,                                  Section  5 of   RFC 7717                                   ofRFC 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 (seeSection 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 20154.  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.  References5.1.  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]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2026 Movatter.jp