<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc [
  <!ENTITY nbsp    "&#160;">
  <!ENTITY zwsp   "&#8203;">
  <!ENTITY nbhy   "&#8209;">
  <!ENTITY wj     "&#8288;">
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="rfc2629.xslt" ?>
<!-- generated by https://github.com/cabo/kramdown-rfc2629 version 1.5.6 -->
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-ietf-ntp-update-registries-03" category="info" updates="5905, 5906, 8573, 7822, 7821" obsoletes="" submissionType="IETF" xml:lang="en" tocInclude="true" sortRefs="true" symRefs="true" version="3">
  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 3.10.0 -->
  <front>
    <title>Updating the NTP Registries</title>
    <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-ntp-update-registries-03"/>
    <author initials="R." surname="Salz" fullname="Rich Salz">
      <organization>Akamai Technologies</organization>
      <address>
        <email>rsalz@akamai.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date year="2021" month="October" day="15"/>
    <workgroup>ntp</workgroup>
    <keyword>NTP</keyword>
    <keyword>extensions</keyword>
    <keyword>registries</keyword>
    <keyword>IANA</keyword>
    <abstract>
      <t>The Network Time Protocol (NTP) and Network Time Security (NTS) documents
define a number of assigned number registries, collectively called the NTP
registries.
Some registries have wrong values, some registries
do not follow current common practice, and some are just right.
For the sake of completeness, this document reviews all NTP and NTS registries.</t>
      <t>This document updates RFC 5905, RFC 5906, RFC 8573, RFC 7822, and
RFC 7821.</t>
    </abstract>
    <note removeInRFC="true">
      <name>Notes</name>
      <t>This document is a product of the
    <eref target="https://dt.ietf.org/wg/ntp">NTP Working Group</eref>.
    Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
    <eref target="https://github.com/richsalz/draft-rsalz-update-registries"/>.
      </t>
      <t>RFC Editor: Please update 'this RFC' to refer to this document,
    once its RFC number is known, through the document.</t>
    </note>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <section anchor="introduction" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Introduction</name>
      <t>The Network Time Protocol (NTP) and Network Time Security (NTS) documents
define a number of assigned number registries, collectively called the NTP
registries.
Some registries have wrong values, some registries
do not follow current common practice, and some are just right.
For the sake of completeness, this document reviews all NTP and NTS registries.</t>
      <t>The bulk of this document can be divided into two parts:</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>First, each registry, its defining document, and a summary of its
syntax is defined.</li>
        <li>Second, the revised format and entries for each registry that is
being modified is specified.</li>
      </ul>
    </section>
    <section anchor="existing-registries" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Existing Registries</name>
      <t>This section describes the registries and the rules for them.
It is intended to be a short summary of the syntax and registration
requirements for each registry.
The semantics and protocol processing rules for each registry -- that is,
how an implementation acts when sending or receiving any of the fields --
is not described here.</t>
      <section anchor="reference-id-kiss-o-death" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>Reference ID, Kiss-o'-Death</name>
        <t><xref target="RFC5905" format="default"/> defined two registries; the Reference ID in Section 7.3, and the
Kiss-o'-Death in Section 7.4.  Both of these are allowed to be four ASCII
characters; padded on the right with all-bits-zero if necessary.
Entries that start with 0x58, the ASCII
letter uppercase X, are reserved for Private or Experimental Use.
Both registries are first-come first-served. The formal request to define
the registries is in Section 16.</t>
        <t><xref section="7.5" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC5905" format="default"/> defined the on-the-wire format of extension
fields but did not create a registry for it.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="extension-field-types" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>Extension Field Types</name>
        <t><xref target="RFC5906" format="default"/> mentioned the Extension Field Types registry, and defined it
indirectly by defining 30 extensions (15 each for request and response)
in Section 13.
It did not provide a formal definition of the columns in the registry.
<xref section="10" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC5906" format="default"/> splits the Field Type into four subfields,
only for use within the Autokey extensions.</t>
        <t><xref target="RFC7821" format="default"/> added a new entry, Checksum Complement, to the Extension
Field Types registry.</t>
        <t><xref target="RFC7822" format="default"/> clarified the processing rules for Extension Field Types,
particularly around the interaction with the Message Authentication Code
(MAC) field.</t>
        <t><xref target="RFC8573" format="default"/> changed the cryptography used in the MAC field.</t>
        <t>The following problems exists with the current registry:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>Many of the entries in the Extension Field Types registry have
swapped some of the nibbles; 0x1234 is listed as 0x1432 for example.
This document marks the erroneous values as reserved.</li>
          <li>Some values were mistakenly re-used.</li>
        </ul>
      </section>
      <section anchor="network-time-security-registries" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>Network Time Security Registries</name>
        <t><xref target="RFC8915" format="default"/> defines the NTS protocol.
Its registries are listed here for completeness, but no changes
to them are specified in this document.</t>
        <t>Sections 7.1 through 7.5 (inclusive) added entries to existing registries.</t>
        <t>Section 7.6 created a new registry, NTS Key Establishment Record Types,
that partitions the assigned numbers into three different registration
policies: IETF Review, Specification Required, and Private or Experimental Use.</t>
        <t>Section 7.7 created a new registry, NTS Next Protocols,
that similarly partitions the assigned numbers.</t>
        <t>Section 7.8 created two new registries, NTS Error Codes and NTS Warning Codes.
Both registries are also partitioned the same way.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="updated-registries" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Updated Registries</name>
      <t>The following general guidelines apply to all registries updated here:</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>Every entry reserves a partition for Private or Experimentatal Use.</li>
        <li>Registries with ASCII fields are now limited to uppercase letters; fields
starting with 0x2D, the ASCII minus sign, are reserved for Private or
Experimental Use..</li>
        <li>The policy for every registry is now Specification Required, as defined
in <xref section="4.6" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC8126" format="default"/>.</li>
      </ul>
      <t>The IESG is requested to choose three designated experts, with two being
required to approve a registry change.</t>
      <t>Each entry described in the below sub-sections is intended to completely
replace the existing entry with the same name.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="iana-considerations" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <section anchor="ntp-reference-identifier-codes" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>NTP Reference Identifier Codes</name>
        <t>The registration procedure is changed to Specification Required.</t>
        <t>The Note is changed to read as follows:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>Codes beginning with the character "-" are reserved for experimentation
and development. IANA cannot assign them.</li>
        </ul>
        <t>The columns are defined as follows:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>ID (required): a four-byte value padded on the right with zero's.
Each value must be an ASCII uppercase letter or minus sign</li>
          <li>Clock source (required): A brief text description of the ID</li>
          <li>Reference (required): the publication defining the ID.</li>
        </ul>
        <t>The existing entries are left unchanged.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="ntp-kiss-o-death-codes" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>NTP Kiss-o'-Death Codes</name>
        <t>The registration procedure is changed to Specification Required.</t>
        <t>The Note is changed to read as follows:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>Codes beginning with the character "-" are reserved for experimentation
and development. IANA cannot assign them.</li>
        </ul>
        <t>The columns are defined as follows:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>ID (required): a four-byte value padded on the right with zero's.
Each value must be an ASCII uppercase letter or minus sign.</li>
          <li>Meaning source (required): A brief text description of the ID.</li>
          <li>Reference (required): the publication defining the ID.</li>
        </ul>
        <t>The existing entries are left unchanged.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="ntp-extension-field-types" numbered="true" toc="default">
        <name>NTP Extension Field Types</name>
        <t>The registration procedure is changed to Specification Required.</t>
        <t>The reference should be <xref target="RFC5906" format="default"/> added, if possible.</t>
        <t>The following Note is added:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>Field Types in the range 0xF000 through 0xFFFF, inclusive, are reserved
for experimentation and development. IANA cannot assign them.
Both NTS Cookie and Autokey Message Request have the same Field Type;
in practice this is not a problem as the field semantics will be
determined by other parts of the message.</li>
        </ul>
        <t>The columns are defined as follows:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>Field Type (required): A two-byte value in hexadecimal.</li>
          <li>Meaning (required): A brief text description of the field type.</li>
          <li>Reference (required): the publication defining the field type.</li>
        </ul>
        <t>The table is replaced with the following entries.</t>
        <table align="center">
          <thead>
            <tr>
              <th align="left">Field Type</th>
              <th align="left">Meaning</th>
              <th align="left">Reference</th>
            </tr>
          </thead>
          <tbody>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0002</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0102</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0104</td>
              <td align="left">Unique Identifier</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 8915, Section 5.3</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0200</td>
              <td align="left">No-Operation Request</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0201</td>
              <td align="left">Association Message Request</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0202</td>
              <td align="left">Certificate Message Request</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0203</td>
              <td align="left">Cookie Message Request</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0204</td>
              <td align="left">NTS Cookie</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 8915, Section 5.4</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0204</td>
              <td align="left">Autokey Message Request</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0205</td>
              <td align="left">Leapseconds Message Request</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0206</td>
              <td align="left">Sign Message Request</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0207</td>
              <td align="left">IFF Identity Message Request</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0208</td>
              <td align="left">GQ Identity Message Request</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0209</td>
              <td align="left">MV Identity Message Request</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0302</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0304</td>
              <td align="left">NTS Cookie Placeholder</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 8915, Section 5.5</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0402</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0404</td>
              <td align="left">NTS Authenticator and Encrypted Extension Fields</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 8915, Section 5.6</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0502</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0602</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0702</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x2005</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8002</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8102</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8200</td>
              <td align="left">No-Operation Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8201</td>
              <td align="left">Association Message Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8202</td>
              <td align="left">Certificate Message Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8203</td>
              <td align="left">Cookie Message Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8204</td>
              <td align="left">Autokey Message Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8205</td>
              <td align="left">Leapseconds Message Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8206</td>
              <td align="left">Sign Message Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8207</td>
              <td align="left">IFF Identity Message Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8208</td>
              <td align="left">GQ Identity Message Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8209</td>
              <td align="left">MV Identity Message Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8302</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8402</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8502</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8602</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8702</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8802</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC002</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC102</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC200</td>
              <td align="left">No-Operation Error Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC201</td>
              <td align="left">Association Message Error Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC202</td>
              <td align="left">Certificate Message Error Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC203</td>
              <td align="left">Cookie Message Error Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC204</td>
              <td align="left">Autokey Message Error Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC205</td>
              <td align="left">Leapseconds Message Error Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC206</td>
              <td align="left">Sign Message Error Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC207</td>
              <td align="left">IFF Identity Message Error Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC208</td>
              <td align="left">GQ Identity Message Error Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC209</td>
              <td align="left">MV Identity Message Error Response</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 5906</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC302</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC402</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC502</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC602</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC702</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC802</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x0902</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0x8902</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="left">0xC902</td>
              <td align="left">Reserved for historic reasons</td>
              <td align="left">This RFC</td>
            </tr>
          </tbody>
        </table>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="acknowledgements" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Acknowledgements</name>
      <t>The members of the NTP Working Group helped a great deal.
Notable contributors include.</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>Miroslav Lichvar, Red Hat</li>
        <li>Daniel Franke, Akamai Technologies</li>
        <li>Danny Mayer, Network Time Foundation</li>
        <li>Michelle Cotton, IANA</li>
      </ul>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <back>
    <references>
      <name>Normative References</name>
      <reference anchor="RFC5905">
        <front>
          <title>Network Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms Specification</title>
          <author fullname="D. Mills" initials="D." surname="Mills">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="J. Martin" initials="J." role="editor" surname="Martin">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="J. Burbank" initials="J." surname="Burbank">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="W. Kasch" initials="W." surname="Kasch">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="June" year="2010"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The Network Time Protocol (NTP) is widely used to synchronize computer clocks in the Internet.  This document describes NTP version 4 (NTPv4), which is backwards compatible with NTP version 3 (NTPv3), described in RFC 1305, as well as previous versions of the protocol. NTPv4 includes a modified protocol header to accommodate the Internet Protocol version 6 address family.  NTPv4 includes fundamental improvements in the mitigation and discipline algorithms that extend the potential accuracy to the tens of microseconds with modern workstations and fast LANs.  It includes a dynamic server discovery scheme, so that in many cases, specific server configuration is not required.  It corrects certain errors in the NTPv3 design and implementation and includes an optional extension mechanism.   [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5905"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5905"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC5906">
        <front>
          <title>Network Time Protocol Version 4: Autokey Specification</title>
          <author fullname="B. Haberman" initials="B." role="editor" surname="Haberman">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="D. Mills" initials="D." surname="Mills">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="June" year="2010"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This memo describes the Autokey security model for authenticating servers to clients using the Network Time Protocol (NTP) and public key cryptography.  Its design is based on the premise that IPsec schemes cannot be adopted intact, since that would preclude stateless servers and severely compromise timekeeping accuracy.  In addition, Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) schemes presume authenticated time values are always available to enforce certificate lifetimes; however, cryptographically verified timestamps require interaction between the timekeeping and authentication functions.</t>
            <t>This memo includes the Autokey requirements analysis, design principles, and protocol specification.  A detailed description of the protocol states, events, and transition functions is included.  A prototype of the Autokey design based on this memo has been implemented, tested, and documented in the NTP version 4 (NTPv4) software distribution for the Unix, Windows, and Virtual Memory System (VMS) operating systems at http://www.ntp.org.  This  document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5906"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5906"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7821">
        <front>
          <title>UDP Checksum Complement in the Network Time Protocol (NTP)</title>
          <author fullname="T. Mizrahi" initials="T." surname="Mizrahi">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="March" year="2016"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The Network Time Protocol (NTP) allows clients to synchronize to a time server using timestamped protocol messages.  To facilitate accurate timestamping, some implementations use hardware-based timestamping engines that integrate the accurate transmission time into every outgoing NTP packet during transmission.  Since these packets are transported over UDP, the UDP Checksum field is then updated to reflect this modification.  This document proposes an extension field that includes a 2-octet Checksum Complement, allowing timestamping engines to reflect the checksum modification in the last 2 octets of the packet rather than in the UDP Checksum field.  The behavior defined in this document is interoperable with existing NTP implementations.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7821"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7821"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC7822">
        <front>
          <title>Network Time Protocol Version 4 (NTPv4) Extension Fields</title>
          <author fullname="T. Mizrahi" initials="T." surname="Mizrahi">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="D. Mayer" initials="D." surname="Mayer">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="March" year="2016"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The Network Time Protocol version 4 (NTPv4) defines the optional usage of extension fields.  An extension field, as defined in RFC 5905, is an optional field that resides at the end of the NTP header and that can be used to add optional capabilities or additional information that is not conveyed in the standard NTP header.  This document updates RFC 5905 by clarifying some points regarding NTP extension fields and their usage with Message Authentication Codes (MACs).</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7822"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7822"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8126">
        <front>
          <title>Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs</title>
          <author fullname="M. Cotton" initials="M." surname="Cotton">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="B. Leiba" initials="B." surname="Leiba">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="T. Narten" initials="T." surname="Narten">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="June" year="2017"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>Many protocols make use of points of extensibility that use constants to identify various protocol parameters.  To ensure that the values in these fields do not have conflicting uses and to promote interoperability, their allocations are often coordinated by a central record keeper.  For IETF protocols, that role is filled by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA).</t>
            <t>To make assignments in a given registry prudently, guidance describing the conditions under which new values should be assigned, as well as when and how modifications to existing values can be made, is needed.  This document defines a framework for the documentation of these guidelines by specification authors, in order to assure that the provided guidance for the IANA Considerations is clear and addresses the various issues that are likely in the operation of a registry.</t>
            <t>This is the third edition of this document; it obsoletes RFC 5226.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="26"/>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8126"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8126"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8573">
        <front>
          <title>Message Authentication Code for the Network Time Protocol</title>
          <author fullname="A. Malhotra" initials="A." surname="Malhotra">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="S. Goldberg" initials="S." surname="Goldberg">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="June" year="2019"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>The Network Time Protocol (NTP), as described in RFC 5905, states that NTP packets should be authenticated by appending NTP data to a 128-bit key and hashing the result with MD5 to obtain a 128-bit tag. This document deprecates MD5-based authentication, which is considered too weak, and recommends the use of AES-CMAC as described in RFC 4493 as a replacement.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8573"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8573"/>
      </reference>
      <reference anchor="RFC8915">
        <front>
          <title>Network Time Security for the Network Time Protocol</title>
          <author fullname="D. Franke" initials="D." surname="Franke">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="D. Sibold" initials="D." surname="Sibold">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="K. Teichel" initials="K." surname="Teichel">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="M. Dansarie" initials="M." surname="Dansarie">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <author fullname="R. Sundblad" initials="R." surname="Sundblad">
            <organization/>
          </author>
          <date month="September" year="2020"/>
          <abstract>
            <t>This memo specifies Network Time Security (NTS), a mechanism for using Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Authenticated Encryption with Associated Data (AEAD) to provide cryptographic security for the client-server mode of the Network Time Protocol (NTP). </t>
            <t>NTS is structured as a suite of two loosely coupled sub-protocols. The first (NTS Key Establishment (NTS-KE)) handles initial authentication and key establishment over TLS. The second (NTS Extension Fields for NTPv4) handles encryption and authentication during NTP time synchronization via extension fields in the NTP packets, and holds all required state only on the client via opaque cookies.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>
        <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8915"/>
        <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8915"/>
      </reference>
    </references>
  </back>
  <!-- ##markdown-source:
H4sIAF/kaWEAA+1aW3PjthV+56/AJA/Z7YgaW76sVnmpq7VTT7LbdO00nel0
OhAJSagoggVIy0o2/73fwYUiZUr2hp1MH+KZbCgQODiX73znAFIcx1Gqkpyv
xYSlms/LWIpyHudlEVdFyksRa7GQptRSmPjkLHKDZsIu3p5cDOjfywEbX7w5
G7A349HI/nsalbLMIPAHmizzBSuXgn24/559rGVFCcQslN5OmMznKtoovVpo
VRUThr0jWegJK3VlytHJyduTURSZkufpv3imcgjeQkAhJxFjpUrcR8aM0qUW
c1N/3q6bHxO1LnhS1m+rWT2SqyhaiS10SCfsH1B0wMRjKXIjVW4GbOeBAbu9
+nD1zyjiVblUmhSI8R9jzoEfZbJkdzz7yY4pvZiwqxVfc8nuRbLMVaYW0m7O
mMBoNmHaYPYfuZ00hD5RrvQaPnsQJPvjzZTcPAkP9dBlGLp0Q+T0SXioh0Zh
aOSGxqcjt5Ae/BAiNwkPfujtqduRHqIojmPGZzAfnoqiewqkKCla7F6uBfte
K4RAZewV3PaaIUbt93ciqbQst/T+7jUD1qq1yEsTpWIuc8E4y6v1TGim5owb
Ixe5SMNQ0+/YIhMJOSbbsoTjQxpQFe3mDaM7hU13A2zJHwTbaAUQPvCsIlGm
PQX4BwBKNscOasOgroaCBJe1yllBdstEDKxpdinXgv0byGRaLpblMLpR2qpi
+EqQGQSrTAA+wmC3cilNbTa2fZBiYxgMsAlh/XV/x5omwMnNJT7jKCI+6fzT
pXtyyUdPLgEhMvKfTocufmuZppmIoi/ZbV5qlVYwSeW/R/M3iqZgsypbkbD2
8oTnbCZYKh9kCgfIvFQMzmYF16WZIHTsRmpTgow4eMUL3Q6YLCGEHE7UGqQ5
kzh4bb3meku7YV5ktnnJH5n0K0Q6hFiEUeXpwNpJNhjsPrfEY4VAmvU2htpb
YwGmSBPNBG29VqmcS9LcMFOIxH4YEsyuHzGfpjQI38HaCIs9aGMSLWfYxSlR
h5gUsENV5lXAp/UwuqWNyUciJ2fBVTPCmwENl02jbeyc0STKS+YW8Fr8p5Ja
WMg+tW5oQ2XAzDkw4jQpQkLgIQECyKadZm3nING8fwbREthDdCVhh7az+zOA
z7DNUuTYJU9JlqK8SAQQgA88ry2AJ7PUQGQEownPwV8pWwotyMlfwrlzPOeJ
YLfvBuxbaUysvorfCV4uo+jnn33R+OWXEHoLrp2rv7Y7NYXAvYQNq+ub4dkg
BCNqyW7POh8y9ieFUae5cRnFKfvqMM1VpdnV3fT2NkqWnHJQaGxf8JRCCTE2
4JR/bCMhCqvjGdAb/yS0YnLOckHO5xSjaw9O62o0BdqvOXm8GDtEu42Qs9gF
7FkInXCo9feB1UxDRf3gAA++kw8gVwrD9SMmShurjP1g4GJrVROZmuKChIwT
Ig736IQNGUHHplDGCGUChALbneOjPYhbHNcuPL0cNqI1aLi2FTqIUHmM/8Ub
qUVIVzi97lQiD5pZBbjI1MIm0YLs4zuUktmydAC6DktBNFjK7rcFJWpQ5hL7
k0MwwWvQuaDBTISXoLEsIwmQA94lSH623VHW2UmjvWKvTi9cIs1tMjjfudQ1
BSaI11HTW2eWCoJ9SEsiTxjone82sVN9KiF7q3VuXd6IA5BUm7nz+ekJTDZF
RgxLk3dWOna2QEbn6Dw9iFSeOY9WABjB0G9yVZUKDWXDzBBjqsrYwyEf5VJs
LN3Cd9OlSFYgMjZVgTUGhKGW36MuvzdkjyA7ybh2vExLO4mrM46DiAqPTCqs
h1kc3bjnYmJdWzmxwCYbDb6njFxYW5cEksRx3FSlInr1/mr62pFYUI7aFFJu
yfOFVy3R26JUC82L5ZY8mIYYYXW92CUW0QmZAGtm8I2BZ2G62WkTCn3wiS2f
7xuMGoqa3+I4km2jEZkNB3v4PsGLyeUMCoC8Th5PR2fnlMsZllAwDY2dn41c
aXjkFMXhXjOHKrVy0BIabYxQlfGdDK0P3GRrNG3qX23A0GjiwHYrQYjTIiZ3
uSTubtCahdf5H918zSfGd1t3dYGjrDL7bOcto4pjjWr3QsQzufIRNZGD6tou
rLsB5+6GB6CzTzYDhjvFS8BssSS2Y69knmSVQVf42idICBpki9BStJqrHVle
eq4LWbUjJTLzWyTjNfw3g0lLG4mP6IF0jXxbTSz8nWrknr0G1vgGbakF9Wxz
WzbLdoNRqEwmko7Ht9f3N9iD+kPQi3OHz5CPrgtJHV0eLUEN+94cte8DmKbu
3oM9Rq6ly+VnLGttNK43onahsZXt3Gmza0BX20Q3dcv7I9eW2+1od+3kmVE7
TTwHGByc2YZvbdto7wvwot01NvN/AexpeGdRgfUzi2TkKCxEZKgLb2xZeWGE
XssG1w8CmW3ZNmQaVu80OtIR7AISN5Rz7GPbjdCwkZ05er8Mri9d/7PrQFxL
Au5wkyPbvZBVvoEZvWs0MMj3HORAgTrauERPUGO1JLdZNLr6JKztNb3ZpnJz
GJf1aYFKr6OP01GjTp4P0Rt4cr69vvuGBPrS7YxOlkrBYp8sgqywwRCkbAkc
OeLeUHsID4TO3K5FQFHVW02L4xhseE2NggvhriP2lD4TdOJDdY5NYJi9E0Pg
r2yLDYuMJ8JRcaAWJ7iuKRabdLNjwUk3P4A3ikYqXLobx7/2XqtuolOqhQiw
TxDnoyZJuIqcVggp1KvroToQDe/lD6rcn48stVXHZYc7MLqknGG7PK+RZetj
6LvZF/EXT/EkGlgnInONHI7nqrCs7azHgZWaLkcf/lxmtQs9FskN/d+eZjhd
vApRfj2xDVul49m29FXu8GmADgFfgVNs7N3cNR3Y6fyX+2TZTzLK310CWc9k
KlmhlFcaUWpqcsVmSGZUd6JQB6qi2T/evnNZHyLcXGsbrApFxQetbnHdQu+d
Fr7q2irmJatyH89hDaX2Uet3DP2/YMiy6nvBrUt+FYyGvymODpzt/jdI0rUV
ZqkqSIcfm6dGG4YBndwLhUDPqBHeq+QBjHaqv+zaNeLhsEbqoDLenJyc1K0i
PuIP0kO32K6PUQcW2cuxaDsX6mimSq2ksCvDcS4ceT76U6q9jqwrxU7/r6ls
hrtG1//6axweTjAE7fqip3HptJHoYmYiSlGm9NomAY7O0Al4tPeCAU9rp8vL
k6dxlm3jFlW4mUNQfYnTS4rw40Ddgv3n4N0ZVmK7X4v7lgQyktp34VoNW7zT
HTXtcOVzA0s+NU3+VBtx7O9TQ89P0adJvPtrfTj415wFAcAqkDuqZTfYEqAo
lZYJUbChXiVoYA+MdIHPvIDT/gLO/asfcgnkNpuUTh/Qtwo4Lu76vYvhWRA2
Qia6aR9U/JfCt0J1SnQKI1ZgOwGn/tWVMSqRbv1+ah0VEPwxRS/pOEp8noCz
IMDl+KG1hwUEhzaI4hioOhx6/lTYIZp5VpsL/+o7wQtj7/bN5/nj0r+6Ix48
6o0DAt74V7c3Nx5d5UE7OgWM/atv/vrs+m4Bb/2r93/7XAGMBJz1TbKzLkx8
TzS1VFm6n2ndmLgIws77anPe0qZxRQcpVNGuc3v5Brl7fYI5oNplkHzRV7XL
vgLe9BQABrvoJWDcl9LHfSl9fJCF3ZX5syk7fo6F23I6BRxn4RcIOMjCHUZ0
CjhMnE8ldAo4TpwvMOEAcb48Cs8QZ0tQp4DjxPkCE44T57MC+hLnuC/Xjfsy
0rgvI437MtJ43FPAtC8jTfsy0vQAI7m74icZ8RRI0+OMtC+nU8AxRnqRgAOM
1GlEp4BDjNQloVPAMUZ6kQmdjPQ5UTjKSHuCOgUcY6QXmXCMkV4goC8jTfsy
0rQvI037MtK0LyNN+zIS/Wizl4BxXwHTPgKiL9lVssrVJhPpwv1gyN1BrIX7
LtDfctBN249Kr+hi4Rv6+SpbiqywX9It6Fs0lgq6Q/mg3N0F8rnUcgZysF8n
JlmV0uXGH9h7qZXJ+AP7TibLB64H0Dllf+Yl3r3jOTpzdqN5vhKDzl+U2kk5
soRvBda2vhK+oa/x3Y0s7ZNAQWgyVWWpcvd71ui/douZdAYsAAA=

-->

</rfc>
