Bundle Protocol Version 7 Administrative Record Types Registry

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.¶

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.¶

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."¶

This Internet-Draft will expire on 11 February 2024.¶

Copyright Notice

Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.¶

This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.¶

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

The earlier Bundle Protocol (BP) Version 6 (BPv6) defined an IANA sub-registry for Administrative Record type code points under [IANA-BP]. When Bundle Protocol Version 7 (BPv7) was published in [RFC9171] it included an explicit table of Administrative Record types but made no mention of an IANA registry nor a requirement for BPv7 agents to be extensible in how they handle Administrative Record types. The BPv7 specification also did not discriminate between code point reservations and unassigned ranges for Administrative Record types.¶

This document updates BPv7 to explicitly use the IANA Administrative Record type registry in Section 2. This document makes a reservation of the zero value for consistency with BPv6. This document also makes a reservation of high-valued code points for private or experimental use to avoid collisions with assigned code points.¶

2. Administrative Record Types Registry

This document updates the requirements in Section 6.1 of [RFC9171] to use an existing IANA registry and updates that sub-registry in Section 4.1.¶

The code point allocated in Annex D of [CCSDS-BP] was never added to the IANA registry. To avoid a collision, this document adds that allocation to the registry.¶

Instead of using the explicit list of types in Section 6.1 of [RFC9171], a BPv7 administrative element SHALL interpret administrative record type code values in accordance with the IANA "Bundle Administrative Record Types" sub-registry under [IANA-BP] for entries having a "Bundle Protocol Version" of 7.¶

If an administrative element receives a not-well-formed ADU or an administrative record type code which is not able to be processed by the element, the record SHALL be ignored by the element. The processing of a received administrative record ADU does not affect the fact that the bundle itself was delivered to the administrative element or any related BPA processing of (e.g. status reports on) the enveloping bundle.¶

3. Security Considerations

This document does not define any requirements or structures which introduce new security considerations.¶

The existing security considerations of [RFC9171] still apply when using the IANA Administrative Record Types sub-registry.¶

4. IANA Considerations

This specification modifies a BPv6 sub-registry to extend BPv7.¶

Acknowledgments

Author's Address