Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) B. Sipos
Request for Comments: 9713 JHU/APL
Updates: 9171 January 2025
Category: Standards Track
ISSN: 2070-1721
Bundle Protocol Version 7 Administrative Record Types Registry
Abstract
This document updates RFC 9171 to clarify that a Bundle Protocol
Version 7 agent is intended agents are expected to use an the IANA registry for "Bundle Administrative
Record Types" registry to identify and document administrative record
types. It This document also makes designates code point reservations points for Private and
Experimental Use.
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/rfc9713.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2025 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
1.1. Scope
1.2. Terminology
2. Administrative Record Types Registry
3. Security Considerations
4. IANA Considerations
4.1. Bundle Administrative Record Types
5. References
5.1. Normative References
5.2. Informative References
Acknowledgments
Author's Address
1. Introduction
The
An earlier Bundle Protocol (BP) Version 6 (BPv6) specification [RFC7116] defined an IANA registry for Administrative Record
administrative record type code points under [IANA-BP]. [IANA-BP] for use with the
Bundle Protocol (BP) Version 6 (BPv6) [RFC5050]. When Bundle
Protocol Version 7 (BPv7) was published in [RFC9171], it identified
the IANA registry for Administrative Record administrative record types but did not update
the table to be explicit about which entries applied to which Bundle
Protocol version(s). The BPv7 specification also did not
discriminate between code point reservations and unassigned ranges
for Administrative Record administrative record types.
This document updates BPv7 to explicitly use the IANA "Bundle
Administrative Record type Types" registry as described 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 Use and Experimental Use in accordance with
[RFC8126] to avoid collisions with assigned code points.
1.1. Scope
This document describes updates to the IANA "Bundle Administrative
Record Types" registry and how a BPv7 agent is supposed to use that
registry to identify Administrative Record administrative record types.
This document does not specify how BPv6 and BPv7 can interoperate for
overlapping
when both use the same code points or how a specific code point is to
be interpreted either similarly or differently between by Bundle Protocol
versions. It is up to The specification for each individual Administrative Record administrative record type
specification is
to define how it the administrative record type relates to each BP
version.
1.2. Terminology
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.
2. Administrative Record Types Registry
This document updates the requirements in Section 6.1 of [RFC9171] to
specify use of an existing IANA registry and updates that registry as
described 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 list of types as described in Section 6.1 of [RFC9171], a
BPv7 administrative element SHALL interpret determine which administrative
record type code values can be used by the "7" noted in accordance with the Bundle
Protocol Version column of the IANA "Bundle Administrative Record
Types" registry [IANA-BP] for entries
having a "Bundle Protocol Version" of 7. [IANA-BP].
If an administrative element receives a not-well-formed application
data unit (ADU) or an administrative record type code that 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 bundle protocol agent
processing of (e.g., status reports on) the enveloping bundle.
3. Security Considerations
This document does not define any requirements or structures that
introduce new security considerations.
The existing security considerations of [RFC9171] still apply when
using the IANA "Bundle Administrative Record Types" registry.
4. IANA Considerations
This specification modifies a BPv6 registry by extending it for BPv7.
4.1. Bundle Administrative Record Types
Within the "Bundle Protocol" registry group [IANA-BP], the "Bundle
Administrative Record Types" registry has been updated to include a
leftmost "Bundle Protocol Version" column. New entries have been
added and existing entries have been updated to include BP versions
as in Table 1. This document makes no changes to the registration
procedures for this registry.
+=========================+=========+==================+============+
| Bundle Protocol | Value | Description | Reference |
| Version | | | |
+=========================+=========+==================+============+
| 6,7 | 0 | Reserved | [RFC7116] |
| | | | RFC 9713 |
+-------------------------+---------+------------------+------------+
| 6,7 | 1 | Bundle status | [RFC5050] |
| | | report | [RFC9171] |
+-------------------------+---------+------------------+------------+
| 6 | 2 | Custody signal | [RFC5050] |
+-------------------------+---------+------------------+------------+
| 6,7 | 3 | Unassigned | |
+-------------------------+---------+------------------+------------+
| 6 | 4 | Aggregate | [CCSDS-BP] |
| | | Custody Signal | |
+-------------------------+---------+------------------+------------+
| 6,7 | 5 - 15 | Unassigned |
+-------------------------+---------+-------------------------------+
| 7 | 16 - | Unassigned |
| | 64383 | |
+-------------------------+---------+------------------+------------+
| 7 | 64384 - | Reserved for | RFC 9713 |
| | 64511 | Experimental Use | |
+-------------------------+---------+------------------+------------+
| 7 | 64512 - | Reserved for | RFC 9713 |
| | 65535 | Private Use | |
+-------------------------+---------+------------------+------------+
Table 1: Bundle Administrative Record Types
5. References
5.1. Normative References
[IANA-BP] IANA, "Bundle Protocol",
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/bundle/>.
[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>.
[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>.
[RFC9171] Burleigh, S., Fall, K., and E. Birrane, III, "Bundle
Protocol Version 7", RFC 9171, DOI 10.17487/RFC9171,
January 2022, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9171>.
5.2. Informative References
[CCSDS-BP] Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems, "CCSDS
Bundle Protocol Specification", CCSDS Recommended
Standard, CCSDS 734.2-B-1, September 2015,
<https://public.ccsds.org/Pubs/734x2b1.pdf>.
[RFC5050] Scott, K. and S. Burleigh, "Bundle Protocol
Specification", RFC 5050, DOI 10.17487/RFC5050, November
2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5050>.
[RFC7116] Scott, K. and M. Blanchet, "Licklider Transmission
Protocol (LTP), Compressed Bundle Header Encoding (CBHE),
and Bundle Protocol IANA Registries", RFC 7116,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7116, February 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7116>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
Acknowledgments
Author's Address
Brian Sipos
The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
11100 Johns Hopkins Rd.
Laurel, MD 20723
United States of America
Email: brian.sipos+ietf@gmail.com