<?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-rfc version 1.7.2 (Ruby 3.2.2) -->
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-ietf-ntp-update-registries-09" category="std" consensus="true" submissionType="IETF" updates="5905, 5906, 8573, 7822, 7821" tocInclude="true" sortRefs="true" symRefs="true" version="3">
  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 3.18.2 -->
  <front>
    <title>Updating the NTP Registries</title>
    <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-ntp-update-registries-09"/>
    <author initials="R." surname="Salz" fullname="Rich Salz">
      <organization>Akamai Technologies</organization>
      <address>
        <email>rsalz@akamai.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date year="2023" month="November" day="22"/>
    <workgroup>ntp</workgroup>
    <keyword>NTP</keyword>
    <keyword>extensions</keyword>
    <keyword>registries</keyword>
    <keyword>IANA</keyword>
    <abstract>
      <?line 34?>

<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,
and makes updates where necessary.</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>
    <?line 47?>

<section anchor="introduction">
      <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,
and makes updates where necessary.</t>
      <t>The bulk of this document can be divided into two parts:</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>First, each registry, its defining document, and a summary of its
syntax is defined.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Second, the revised format and entries for each registry that is
being modified is specified.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
    </section>
    <section anchor="existing-registries">
      <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 --
are not described here.</t>
      <section anchor="reference-id-kiss-o-death">
        <name>Reference ID, Kiss-o'-Death</name>
        <t><xref target="RFC5905"/> 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>
      </section>
      <section anchor="extension-field-types">
        <name>Extension Field Types</name>
        <t><xref section="7.5" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC5905"/> defined the on-the-wire format of extension
fields but did not create a registry for them.</t>
        <t><xref section="13" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC5906"/> mentioned the Extension Field Types registry, and defined it
indirectly by defining 30 extensions (10 each for request, response, and
error response).
It did not provide a formal definition of the columns in the registry.
<xref section="10" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC5906"/> splits the Field Type into four subfields,
only for use within the Autokey extensions.</t>
        <t><xref target="RFC7821"/> added a new entry, Checksum Complement, to the Extension
Field Types registry.</t>
        <t><xref target="RFC7822"/> clarified the processing rules for Extension Field Types,
particularly around the interaction with the Message Authentication Code
(MAC) field.</t>
        <t><xref target="RFC8573"/> changed the cryptography used in the MAC field.</t>
        <t><xref target="RFC8915"/> added four new entries to the Extension Field Types registry.</t>
        <t>The following problems exists with the current registry:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            <t>Many of the entries in the Extension Field Types registry have
swapped some of the nibbles; 0x1234 is listed as 0x1432 for example.
This was due to documentation errors with the original implementation
of Autokey.
This document marks the erroneous values as reserved, in case there
is an implementation that used the registered values
instead of what the original implementation used.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Some values were mistakenly re-used.</t>
          </li>
        </ul>
      </section>
      <section anchor="network-time-security-registries">
        <name>Network Time Security Registries</name>
        <t><xref target="RFC8915"/> 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">
      <name>Updated Registries</name>
      <t>The following general guidelines apply to all registries updated here:</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>Every registry reserves a partition for Private or Experimental Use.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Entries with ASCII fields are now limited to uppercase letters; fields
starting with 0x58, the uppercase letter "X", are reserved for Private or
Experimental Use.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>The policy for every registry is now Specification Required, as defined
in <xref section="4.6" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC8126"/>.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <t>The IESG is requested to choose three designated experts, with two being
required to approve a registry change. Guidance for such experts is
given below.</t>
      <t>Each entry described in the sub-sections below is intended to completely
replace the existing entry with the same name.</t>
      <section anchor="guidance-to-designated-experts">
        <name>Guidance to Designated Experts</name>
        <t>The designated experts (DE) should be familiar with <xref target="RFC8126"/>, particularly
Section 5. As that reference suggests, the DE should ascertain the existence
of a suitable specification, and verify that it is publicly available. The DE
is also expected to check the clarity of purpose and use of the requested
code points.</t>
        <t>In addition, the DE is expected to be familiar with this document,
specifically the history documented here.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="iana-considerations">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <section anchor="ntp-reference-identifier-codes">
        <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>
            <t>Codes beginning with the character "X" are reserved for experimentation
and development. IANA cannot assign them.</t>
          </li>
        </ul>
        <t>The columns are defined as follows:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            <t>ID (required): a four-byte value padded on the right with zeros.
Each byte other than padding must be an ASCII uppercase letter or minus sign</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Clock source (required): A brief text description of the ID</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Reference (required): the publication defining the ID.</t>
          </li>
        </ul>
        <t>The existing entries are left unchanged.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="ntp-kiss-o-death-codes">
        <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>
            <t>Codes beginning with the character "X" are reserved for experimentation
and development. IANA cannot assign them.</t>
          </li>
        </ul>
        <t>The columns are defined as follows:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            <t>ID (required): a four-byte value padded on the right with zeros.
Each byte other than padding must be an ASCII uppercase letter or minus sign.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Meaning source (required): A brief text description of the ID.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Reference (required): the publication defining the ID.</t>
          </li>
        </ul>
        <t>The existing entries are left unchanged.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="ntp-extension-field-types">
        <name>NTP Extension Field Types</name>
        <t>The registration procedure is changed to Specification Required.</t>
        <t>The reference <xref target="RFC5906"/> should be added, if possible.</t>
        <t>The following two Notes are added:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            <t>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.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>The "Reserved for historic reasons" is for differences between the
original documentation and implementation of Autokey and marks
the erroneous values as reserved, in case there is an implementation
that used the registered values instead of what the original
implementation used.</t>
          </li>
        </ul>
        <t>The columns are defined as follows:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            <t>Field Type (required): A two-byte value in hexadecimal.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Meaning (required): A brief text description of the field type.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Reference (required): the publication defining the field type.</t>
          </li>
        </ul>
        <t>The table is replaced with the following entries.</t>
        <table>
          <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">UDP Checksum Complement</td>
              <td align="left">RFC 7821</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">
      <name>Acknowledgements</name>
      <t>The members of the NTP Working Group helped a great deal.
Notable contributors include:</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>Miroslav Lichvar, Red Hat</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Daniel Franke, formerly at Akamai Technologies</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Danny Mayer, Network Time Foundation</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Michelle Cotton, formerly at IANA</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Tamme Dittrich, Tweede Golf</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <back>
    <references anchor="sec-normative-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"/>
          <author fullname="J. Martin" initials="J." role="editor" surname="Martin"/>
          <author fullname="J. Burbank" initials="J." surname="Burbank"/>
          <author fullname="W. Kasch" initials="W." surname="Kasch"/>
          <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"/>
          <author fullname="D. Mills" initials="D." surname="Mills"/>
          <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"/>
          <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"/>
          <author fullname="D. Mayer" initials="D." surname="Mayer"/>
          <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"/>
          <author fullname="B. Leiba" initials="B." surname="Leiba"/>
          <author fullname="T. Narten" initials="T." surname="Narten"/>
          <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"/>
          <author fullname="S. Goldberg" initials="S." surname="Goldberg"/>
          <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"/>
          <author fullname="D. Sibold" initials="D." surname="Sibold"/>
          <author fullname="K. Teichel" initials="K." surname="Teichel"/>
          <author fullname="M. Dansarie" initials="M." surname="Dansarie"/>
          <author fullname="R. Sundblad" initials="R." surname="Sundblad"/>
          <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: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-->

</rfc>
