<?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-10" 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-10"/>
    <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="27"/>
    <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 or digit; 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 all-bits-zero.
Each byte other than padding must be an ASCII uppercase letter or digit.</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 all-bits-zero.
Each byte other than padding must be an ASCII uppercase letter or digit.</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">Autokey 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">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">0x0902</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">0x8902</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">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>
