





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]

