[Docs] [txt|pdf] [draft-ietf-rege...] [Tracker] [Diff1] [Diff2]
PROPOSED STANDARD

    Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                          J. Gould
    Request for Comments: 8495                                VeriSign, Inc.
    Category: Standards Track                                       K. Feher
    ISSN: 2070-1721                                                  Neustar
                                                               November 2018

                           Allocation Token Extension
                 for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)

    Abstract

       This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
       extension for including an Allocation Token in "query" and
       "transform" commands.  The Allocation Token is used as a credential
       that authorizes a client to request the allocation of a specific
       object from the server using one of the EPP transform commands,
       including "create" and "transfer".

    Status of This Memo

       This is an Internet Standards Track document.

       This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
       (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
       received public review and has been approved for publication by the
       Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
       Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.

       Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
       and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
       https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8495.

    Copyright Notice

       Copyright (c) 2018 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 Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
       the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
       described in the Simplified BSD License.

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                    [Page 1]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

    Table of Contents

       1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
         1.1.  Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
       2.  Object Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
         2.1.  Allocation Token  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
       3.  EPP Command Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
         3.1.  EPP Query Commands  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
           3.1.1.  EPP <check> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
           3.1.2.  EPP <info> Command  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
           3.1.3.  EPP <transfer> Query Command  . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
         3.2.  EPP Transform Commands  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
           3.2.1.  EPP <create> Command  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
           3.2.2.  EPP <delete> Command  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
           3.2.3.  EPP <renew> Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
           3.2.4.  EPP <transfer> Command  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
           3.2.5.  EPP <update> Command  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
       4.  Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
         4.1.  Allocation Token Extension Schema . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
       5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
         5.1.  XML Namespace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
         5.2.  EPP Extension Registry  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
       6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
       7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
         7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
         7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
       Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
       Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17

    1.  Introduction

       This document describes an extension mapping for version 1.0 of the
       Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) [RFC5730].  This mapping,
       which is an extension to EPP object mappings similar to the EPP
       domain name mapping [RFC5731], supports passing an Allocation Token
       as a credential that authorizes a client to request the allocation of
       a specific object from the server using one of the EPP transform
       commands, including "create" and "transfer".

       Allocation is when a server assigns the sponsoring client of an
       object based on the use of an Allocation Token credential.  Examples
       include allocating a registration based on a pre-eligibility
       Allocation Token, allocating a premium domain name registration based
       on an auction Allocation Token, allocating a registration based on a
       founders Allocation Token, and allocating an existing domain name
       held by the server or by a different sponsoring client based on an
       Allocation Token that is passed with a transfer command.

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                    [Page 2]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

       Clients pass an Allocation Token to the server for validation, and
       the server determines if the supplied Allocation Token is one
       supported by the server.  It is up to server policy which EPP
       transform commands and which objects require the Allocation Token.
       The Allocation Token MAY be returned to an authorized client for
       passing out-of-band to a client that uses it with an EPP transform
       command.

    1.1.  Conventions Used in This Document

       The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
       "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
       "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
       BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
       capitals, as shown here.

       XML is case sensitive.  Unless stated otherwise, XML specifications
       and examples provided in this document MUST be interpreted in the
       character case presented in order to develop a conforming
       implementation.

       In examples, "C:" represents lines sent by a protocol client and "S:"
       represents lines returned by a protocol server.  Indentation and
       white space in the examples are provided only to illustrate element
       relationships and are not REQUIRED in the protocol.

       The XML namespace prefix "allocationToken" is used for the namespace
       "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0", but implementations
       MUST NOT depend on it and instead employ a proper namespace-aware XML
       parser and serializer to interpret and output the XML documents.

       The "abc123" token value is used as a placeholder value in the
       examples.  The server MUST support token values that follow the
       Security Considerations (Section 6).

       The domain-object attribute values, including the "2fooBAR"
       <domain:pw> value, in the examples are provided for illustration
       purposes only.  Refer to [RFC5731] for details on the domain-object
       attributes.

    2.  Object Attributes

       This extension adds additional elements to EPP object mappings
       similar to the EPP domain name mapping [RFC5731].  Only those new
       elements are described here.

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                    [Page 3]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

    2.1.  Allocation Token

       The Allocation Token is a simple XML "token" type.  The exact format
       of the Allocation Token is up to server policy.  The server MAY have
       the Allocation Token for each object to match against the Allocation
       Token passed by the client to authorize the allocation of the object.
       The <allocationToken:allocationToken> element is used for all of the
       supported EPP commands as well as the info response.  If the supplied
       Allocation Token passed to the server does not apply to the object,
       the server MUST return an EPP error result code of 2201.

       Authorization information, similar to what is defined in the EPP
       domain name mapping [RFC5731], is associated with objects to
       facilitate transfer operations.  The authorization information is
       assigned when an object is created.  The Allocation Token and the
       authorization information are both credentials but are used for
       different purposes and in different ways.  The Allocation Token is
       used to facilitate the allocation of an object instead of
       transferring the sponsorship of the object.  The Allocation Token is
       not managed by the client but is validated by the server to authorize
       assigning the initial sponsoring client of the object.

       An example <allocationToken:allocationToken> element with value of
       "abc123":

       <allocationToken:allocationToken xmlns:allocationToken=
                 "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0">
         abc123
       </allocationToken:allocationToken>

    3.  EPP Command Mapping

       A detailed description of the EPP syntax and semantics can be found
       in the EPP core protocol specification [RFC5730].

    3.1.  EPP Query Commands

       EPP provides three commands to retrieve object information: <check>
       to determine if an object can be provisioned, <info> to retrieve
       information associated with an object, and <transfer> to retrieve
       object-transfer status information.

    3.1.1.  EPP <check> Command

       This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP <check>
       command of an object mapping similar to the mapping specified in
       [RFC5731].

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                    [Page 4]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

       This extension allows clients to check the availability of an object
       with an Allocation Token, as described in Section 2.1.  Clients can
       check if an object can be created using the Allocation Token.  The
       Allocation Token is applied to all object names included in the EPP
       <check> command.

       The following is an example <check> command for the
       allocation.example domain name using the
       <allocationToken:allocationToken> extension with the allocation token
       of 'abc123':

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:    <check>
       C:      <domain:check
       C:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:        <domain:name>allocation.example</domain:name>
       C:      </domain:check>
       C:    </check>
       C:    <extension>
       C:      <allocationToken:allocationToken
       C:        xmlns:allocationToken=
       C:          "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0">
       C:        abc123
       C:      </allocationToken:allocationToken>
       C:    </extension>
       C:    <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

       If the query was successful, the server replies with a <check>
       response providing the availability status of the queried object
       based on the following Allocation Token cases where the object is
       otherwise available:

       1.  If an object requires an Allocation Token and the Allocation
           Token does apply to the object, then the server MUST return the
           availability status as available (e.g., the "avail" attribute is
           "1" or "true").
       2.  If an object requires an Allocation Token and the Allocation
           Token does not apply to the object, then the server SHOULD return
           the availability status as unavailable (e.g., the "avail"
           attribute is "0" or "false").
       3.  If an object does not require an Allocation Token, the server MAY
           return the availability status as available (e.g., the "avail"
           attribute is "1" or "true").

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                    [Page 5]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

       The following is an example <check> domain response for a <check>
       command using the <allocationToken:allocationToken> extension:

       S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
       S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       S: <response>
       S:  <result code="1000">
       S:   <msg lang="en-US">Command completed successfully</msg>
       S:  </result>
       S:  <resData>
       S:   <domain:chkData
       S:     xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       S:    <domain:cd>
       S:     <domain:name avail="1">allocation.example</domain:name>
       S:    </domain:cd>
       S:   </domain:chkData>
       S:  </resData>
       S:  <trID>
       S:   <clTRID>ABC-DEF-12345</clTRID>
       S:   <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
       S:  </trID>
       S: </response>
       S:</epp>

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                    [Page 6]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

       The following is an example <check> command with the
       <allocationToken:allocationToken> extension for the
       allocation.example and allocation2.example domain names.
       Availability of allocation.example and allocation2.example domain
       names are based on the Allocation Token 'abc123':

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C: <command>
       C:  <check>
       C:   <domain:check
       C:     xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:    <domain:name>allocation.example</domain:name>
       C:    <domain:name>allocation2.example</domain:name>
       C:   </domain:check>
       C:  </check>
       C:  <extension>
       C:   <allocationToken:allocationToken
       C:     xmlns:allocationToken=
       C:       "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0">
       C:     abc123
       C:   </allocationToken:allocationToken>
       C:  </extension>
       C:  <clTRID>ABC-DEF-12345</clTRID>
       C: </command>
       C:</epp>

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                    [Page 7]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

       The following is an example <check> domain response for multiple
       domain names in the <check> command using the
       <allocationToken:allocationToken> extension, where the Allocation
       Token 'abc123' matches allocation.example but does not match
       allocation2.example:

       S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
       S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       S: <response>
       S:  <result code="1000">
       S:   <msg lang="en-US">Command completed successfully</msg>
       S:  </result>
       S:  <resData>
       S:   <domain:chkData
       S:     xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       S:    <domain:cd>
       S:     <domain:name avail="1">allocation.example</domain:name>
       S:    </domain:cd>
       S:    <domain:cd>
       S:     <domain:name avail="0">allocation2.example</domain:name>
       S:     <domain:reason>Allocation Token mismatch</domain:reason>
       S:    </domain:cd>
       S:   </domain:chkData>
       S:  </resData>
       S:  <trID>
       S:   <clTRID>ABC-DEF-12345</clTRID>
       S:   <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
       S:  </trID>
       S: </response>
       S:</epp>

       This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <check> response
       described in [RFC5730].

    3.1.2.  EPP <info> Command

       This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP <info>
       command of an object mapping similar to the mapping specified in
       [RFC5731].

       The EPP <info> command allows a client to request information
       associated with an existing object.  Authorized clients MAY retrieve
       the Allocation Token (Section 2.1) along with the other object
       information by supplying the <allocationToken:info> element in the
       command.  The <allocationToken:info> element is an empty element that
       serves as a marker to the server to return the
       <allocationToken:allocationToken> element in the info response.  If
       the client is not authorized to receive the Allocation Token, the

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                    [Page 8]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

       server MUST return an EPP error result code of 2201.  If the client
       is authorized to receive the Allocation Token, but there is no
       Allocation Token associated with the object, the server MUST return
       an EPP error result code of 2303.  The authorization is subject to
       server policy.

       The following is an example <info> command with the
       allocationToken:info extension for the allocation.example domain
       name:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:   <info>
       C:    <domain:info
       C:      xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:      <domain:name>allocation.example</domain:name>
       C:    </domain:info>
       C:   </info>
       C:   <extension>
       C:      <allocationToken:info
       C:        xmlns:allocationToken=
       C:          "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0"/>
       C:   </extension>
       C:   <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

       If the query was successful, the server replies with an
       <allocationToken:allocationToken> element along with the regular EPP
       <resData>.  The <allocationToken:allocationToken> element is
       described in Section 2.1.

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                    [Page 9]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

       The following is an example <info> domain response using the
       <allocationToken:allocationToken> extension:

       S:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       S:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       S:  <response>
       S:    <result code="1000">
       S:      <msg>Command completed successfully</msg>
       S:    </result>
       S:    <resData>
       S:      <domain:infData
       S:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       S:        <domain:name>allocation.example</domain:name>
       S:        <domain:roid>EXAMPLE1-REP</domain:roid>
       S:        <domain:status s="pendingCreate"/>
       S:        <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
       S:        <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
       S:        <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
       S:        <domain:clID>ClientX</domain:clID>
       S:        <domain:crID>ClientY</domain:crID>
       S:        <domain:crDate>2012-04-03T22:00:00.0Z</domain:crDate>
       S:        <domain:authInfo>
       S:          <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
       S:        </domain:authInfo>
       S:      </domain:infData>
       S:    </resData>
       S:    <extension>
       S:      <allocationToken:allocationToken
       S:        xmlns:allocationToken=
       S:          "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0">
       S:        abc123
       S:      </allocationToken:allocationToken>
       S:    </extension>
       S:    <trID>
       S:      <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       S:      <svTRID>54321-XYZ</svTRID>
       S:    </trID>
       S:  </response>
       S:</epp>

    3.1.3.  EPP <transfer> Query Command

       This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <transfer> query
       command or <transfer> query response described in [RFC5730].

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                   [Page 10]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

    3.2.  EPP Transform Commands

       EPP provides five commands to transform objects: <create> to create
       an instance of an object, <delete> to delete an instance of an
       object, <renew> to extend the validity period of an object,
       <transfer> to manage object sponsorship changes, and <update> to
       change information associated with an object.

    3.2.1.  EPP <create> Command

       This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP <create>
       command of an object mapping similar to the mapping specified in
       [RFC5731].

       The EPP <create> command provides a transform operation that allows a
       client to create an instance of an object.  In addition to the EPP
       command elements described in an object mapping similar to the
       mapping specified in [RFC5731], the command MUST contain a child
       <allocationToken:allocationToken> element for the client to be
       authorized to create and allocate the object.  If the Allocation
       Token does not apply to the object, the server MUST return an EPP
       error result code of 2201.

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                   [Page 11]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

       The following is an example <create> command to create a domain
       object with an Allocation Token:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:    <create>
       C:      <domain:create
       C:       xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:        <domain:name>allocation.example</domain:name>
       C:        <domain:registrant>jd1234</domain:registrant>
       C:        <domain:contact type="admin">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:contact type="tech">sh8013</domain:contact>
       C:        <domain:authInfo>
       C:          <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
       C:        </domain:authInfo>
       C:      </domain:create>
       C:    </create>
       C:    <extension>
       C:      <allocationToken:allocationToken
       C:        xmlns:allocationToken=
       C:          "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0">
       C:        abc123
       C:      </allocationToken:allocationToken>
       C:    </extension>
       C:    <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

       This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <create> response
       described in [RFC5730].

    3.2.2.  EPP <delete> Command

       This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <delete> command
       or <delete> response described in [RFC5730].

    3.2.3.  EPP <renew> Command

       This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <renew> command
       or <renew> response described in [RFC5730].

    3.2.4.  EPP <transfer> Command

       This extension defines additional elements to extend the EPP
       <transfer> command of an object mapping similar to the mapping
       specified in [RFC5731].

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                   [Page 12]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

       The EPP <transfer> command provides a transform operation that allows
       a client to request the transfer of an object.  In addition to the
       EPP command elements described in an object mapping similar to the
       mapping specified in [RFC5731], the command MUST contain a child
       <allocationToken:allocationToken> element for the client to be
       authorized to transfer and allocate the object.  The authorization
       associated with the Allocation Token is in addition to, and does not
       replace, the authorization mechanism defined for the object's
       <transfer> command.  If the Allocation Token is invalid or not
       required for the object, the server MUST return an EPP error result
       code of 2201.

       The following is an example <transfer> command to allocate the domain
       object with the Allocation Token:

       C:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
       C:<epp xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:epp-1.0">
       C:  <command>
       C:    <transfer op="request">
       C:      <domain:transfer
       C:        xmlns:domain="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:domain-1.0">
       C:        <domain:name>example1.tld</domain:name>
       C:        <domain:period unit="y">1</domain:period>
       C:        <domain:authInfo>
       C:          <domain:pw>2fooBAR</domain:pw>
       C:        </domain:authInfo>
       C:      </domain:transfer>
       C:    </transfer>
       C:    <extension>
       C:      <allocationToken:allocationToken
       C:        xmlns:allocationToken=
       C:          "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0">
       C:        abc123
       C:      </allocationToken:allocationToken>
       C:    </extension>
       C:    <clTRID>ABC-12345</clTRID>
       C:  </command>
       C:</epp>

       This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <transfer>
       response described in [RFC5730].

    3.2.5.  EPP <update> Command

       This extension does not add any elements to the EPP <update> command
       or <update> response described in [RFC5730].

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                   [Page 13]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

    4.  Formal Syntax

       One schema is presented here: the EPP Allocation Token Extension
       schema.

       The formal syntax presented here is a complete schema representation
       of the object mapping suitable for automated validation of EPP XML
       instances.  The BEGIN and END tags are not part of the schema; they
       are used to note the beginning and ending of the schema for URI
       registration purposes.

    4.1.  Allocation Token Extension Schema

       BEGIN
       <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
       <schema xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
         xmlns:allocationToken="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0"
         targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0"
         elementFormDefault="qualified">
         <annotation>
           <documentation>
             Extensible Provisioning Protocol v1.0
             Allocation Token Extension
           </documentation>
         </annotation>

         <!-- Element used in info command to get allocation token. -->
         <element name="info">
           <complexType>
             <complexContent>
               <restriction base="anyType" />
             </complexContent>
           </complexType>
         </element>

         <!-- Allocation Token used in transform
           commands and info response -->
         <element name="allocationToken"
           type="allocationToken:allocationTokenType" />
         <simpleType name="allocationTokenType">
           <restriction base="token">
             <minLength value="1" />
           </restriction>
         </simpleType>

       <!-- End of schema. -->
       </schema>
       END

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                   [Page 14]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

    5.  IANA Considerations

    5.1.  XML Namespace

       This document uses URNs to describe XML namespaces and XML schemas
       conforming to a registry mechanism described in [RFC3688].

       The allocationToken namespace has been registered as follows.

          URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:allocationToken-1.0
          Registrant Contact: IESG
          XML: None.  Namespace URIs do not represent an XML specification.

       The allocationToken XML schema has been registered as follows.

          URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:allocationToken-1.0
          Registrant Contact: IESG
          XML: See the "Formal Syntax" section of this document.

    5.2.  EPP Extension Registry

       The following entry has been added to the Extensions for the
       Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) registry, as described in
       [RFC7451].

       Name of Extension: Allocation Token Extension for the Extensible
       Provisioning Protocol (EPP)

       Document Status: Standards Track

       Reference: RFC 8495

       Registrant: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>

       TLDs: Any

       IPR Disclosure: None

       Status: Active

       Notes: None

    6.  Security Considerations

       The mapping described in this document does not provide any security
       services beyond those described by EPP [RFC5730] and protocol layers
       used by EPP.  The security considerations described in these other
       specifications apply to this specification as well.

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                   [Page 15]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

       The mapping acts as a conduit for the passing of Allocation Tokens
       between a client and a server.  The definition of the Allocation
       Token SHOULD be defined outside of this mapping.  The following are
       security considerations in the definition and use of an Allocation
       Token:

       1.  An Allocation Token should be considered secret information by
           the client; it SHOULD be protected at rest and MUST be protected
           in transit.
       2.  An Allocation Token should be single use, meaning it should be
           unique per object and per allocation operation.
       3.  An Allocation Token should have a limited life with some form of
           expiry in the Allocation Token, if generated by a trusted third
           party, or with a server-side expiry, if generated by the server.
       4.  An Allocation Token should use a strong random value if it is
           based on an unsigned code.
       5.  An Allocation Token should leverage digital signatures to confirm
           its authenticity if generated by a trusted third party.
       6.  An Allocation Token that is signed XML should be encoded (e.g.,
           base64 [RFC4648]) to mitigate server validation issues.

    7.  References

    7.1.  Normative References

       [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
                  Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
                  DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
                  <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

       [RFC3688]  Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
                  DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
                  <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.

       [RFC5730]  Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)",
                  STD 69, RFC 5730, DOI 10.17487/RFC5730, August 2009,
                  <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5730>.

       [RFC5731]  Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)
                  Domain Name Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5731,
                  DOI 10.17487/RFC5731, August 2009,
                  <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5731>.

       [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
                  2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
                  May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                   [Page 16]

    RFC 8495                    Allocation Token               November 2018

    7.2.  Informative References

       [RFC4648]  Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data
                  Encodings", RFC 4648, DOI 10.17487/RFC4648, October 2006,
                  <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4648>.

       [RFC7451]  Hollenbeck, S., "Extension Registry for the Extensible
                  Provisioning Protocol", RFC 7451, DOI 10.17487/RFC7451,
                  February 2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7451>.

    Acknowledgements

       The authors wish to acknowledge the original concept for this
       document and the efforts in the initial draft versions of this
       document by Trung Tran and Sharon Wodjenski.

       Special suggestions that have been incorporated into this document
       were provided by Ben Campbell, Scott Hollenbeck, Benjamin Kaduk,
       Mirja Kuehlewind, Rubens Kuhl, Alexander Mayrhofer, Patrick Mevzek,
       Eric Rescoria, and Adam Roach.

    Authors' Addresses

       James Gould
       VeriSign, Inc.
       12061 Bluemont Way
       Reston, VA  20190
       United States of America

       Email: jgould@verisign.com
       URI:   http://www.verisign.com

       Kal Feher
       Neustar
       lvl 8/10 Queens Road
       Melbourne, VIC  3004
       Australia

       Email: ietf@feherfamily.org
       URI:   http://www.neustar.biz

    Gould & Feher                Standards Track                   [Page 17]

Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129b, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/