draft-ietf-ippm-port-twamp-test-03.txt   draft-ietf-ippm-port-twamp-test-04.txt 
Network Working Group A. Morton, Ed. Network Working Group A. Morton, Ed.
Internet-Draft AT&T Labs Internet-Draft AT&T Labs
Updates: 4656 and 5357 (if approved) G. Mirsky, Ed. Updates: 4656 and 5357 (if approved) G. Mirsky, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track ZTE Corp. Intended status: Standards Track ZTE Corp.
Expires: May 8, 2019 November 4, 2018 Expires: June 12, 2019 December 9, 2018
OWAMP and TWAMP Well-Known Port Assignments OWAMP and TWAMP Well-Known Port Assignments
draft-ietf-ippm-port-twamp-test-03 draft-ietf-ippm-port-twamp-test-04
Abstract Abstract
This memo explains the motivation and describes the re-assignment of This memo explains the motivation and describes the re-assignment of
well-known ports for the OWAMP and TWAMP protocols for control and well-known ports for the One-way Active Measurement Protocol and Two-
measurement, and clarifies the meaning and composition of these way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP and TWAMP) protocols for
standards track protocol names for the industry. control and measurement, and clarifies the meaning and composition of
these standards track protocol names for the industry.
The memo updates RFC 4656 and RFC 5357, in terms of the UDP well- The memo updates RFC 4656 and RFC 5357, in terms of the UDP well-
known port assignments, and clarifies the complete OWAMP and TWAMP known port assignments, and clarifies the complete OWAMP and TWAMP
protocol composition for the industry. protocol composition for the industry.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 8, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on June 12, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 44 skipping to change at page 2, line 45
in the Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol, TWAMP, specified in in the Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol, TWAMP, specified in
[RFC5357]. [RFC5357].
Both OWAMP and TWAMP require the implementation of a control and mode Both OWAMP and TWAMP require the implementation of a control and mode
negotiation protocol (OWAMP-Control and TWAMP-Control) which employs negotiation protocol (OWAMP-Control and TWAMP-Control) which employs
the reliable transport services of TCP (including security the reliable transport services of TCP (including security
configuration and key derivation). The control protocols arrange for configuration and key derivation). The control protocols arrange for
the configuration and management of test sessions using the the configuration and management of test sessions using the
associated test protocol (OWAMP-Test or TWAMP-Test) on UDP transport. associated test protocol (OWAMP-Test or TWAMP-Test) on UDP transport.
This memo recognizes the value of assigning a well-known UDP port to In this memo, IETF recognizes the value of assigning a well-known UDP
the *-Test protocols, and that this goal can easily be arranged port to the *-Test protocols, and that this goal can easily be
through port re-assignments. arranged through port re-assignments.
2. Requirements Language 2. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
[RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals,
as shown here. as shown here.
3. Scope 3. Scope
skipping to change at page 3, line 35 skipping to change at page 3, line 35
This section defines key terms and clarifies the required composition This section defines key terms and clarifies the required composition
of the OWAMP and TWAMP standards-track protocols. of the OWAMP and TWAMP standards-track protocols.
OWAMP-Control is the protocol defined in Section 3 of [RFC4656]. OWAMP-Control is the protocol defined in Section 3 of [RFC4656].
OWAMP-Test is the protocol defined in Section 4 of [RFC4656]. OWAMP-Test is the protocol defined in Section 4 of [RFC4656].
OWAMP is described in a direct quote from Section 1.1 of[RFC4656]: OWAMP is described in a direct quote from Section 1.1 of[RFC4656]:
"OWAMP actually consists of two inter-related protocols: OWAMP- "OWAMP actually consists of two inter-related protocols: OWAMP-
Control and OWAMP-Test." A similar sentence appears in Section 2 of Control and OWAMP-Test." A similar sentence appears in Section 2 of
[RFC4656]. Since the consensus of many dictionary definitions of [RFC4656]. For avoidance of doubt, implementation of both OWAMP-
"consist" is "composed or made up of", implementation of both OWAMP-
Control and OWAMP-Test are REQUIRED for standards-track OWAMP Control and OWAMP-Test are REQUIRED for standards-track OWAMP
specified in [RFC4656]. specified in [RFC4656] (aplying the consensus of many dictionary
definitions of "consist").
TWAMP-Control is the protocol defined in Section 3 of [RFC5357]. TWAMP-Control is the protocol defined in Section 3 of [RFC5357].
TWAMP-Test is the protocol defined in Section 4 of [RFC5357]. TWAMP-Test is the protocol defined in Section 4 of [RFC5357].
TWAMP is described in a direct quote from Section 1.1 of [RFC5357]: TWAMP is described in a direct quote from Section 1.1 of [RFC5357]:
"Similar to OWAMP [RFC4656], TWAMP consists of two inter-related "Similar to OWAMP [RFC4656], TWAMP consists of two inter-related
protocols: TWAMP-Control and TWAMP-Test." Since the consensus of protocols: TWAMP-Control and TWAMP-Test." For avoidance of doubt,
many dictionary definitions of "consist" is "composed or made up of",
implementation of both TWAMP-Control and TWAMP-Test are REQUIRED for implementation of both TWAMP-Control and TWAMP-Test are REQUIRED for
standards-track TWAMP specified in [RFC5357]. standards-track TWAMP specified in [RFC5357] (aplying the consensus
of many dictionary definitions of "consist").
TWAMP Light is an idea described in Informative Appendix I of TWAMP Light is an idea described in Informative Appendix I of
[RFC5357], and includes an un-specified control protocol (possibly [RFC5357], and includes an un-specified control protocol combined
communicating through non-standard means) combined with the TWAMP- with the TWAMP-Test protocol. The TWAMP Light idea was relegated to
Test protocol. The TWAMP Light idea was relegated to the the Appendix because it failed to meet the requirements for IETF
Appendix because it failed to meet the requirements for IETF
protocols (there are no specifications for negotiating this form of protocols (there are no specifications for negotiating this form of
operation, and no specifications for mandatory-to-implement security operation, and no specifications for mandatory-to-implement security
features), as described in Appendix A of this memo, which cites features), as described in Appendix A of this memo, which cites
[LarsAD] and [TimDISCUSS] . [LarsAD] and [TimDISCUSS] .
Since the idea of TWAMP Light clearly includes the TWAMP-Test Since the idea of TWAMP Light clearly includes the TWAMP-Test
component of TWAMP, it is considered reasonable for future systems to component of TWAMP, it is considered reasonable for future systems to
use the TWAMP-Test well-known UDP port (whose re-allocated assignment use the TWAMP-Test well-known UDP port (whose re-allocated assignment
is requested here). Clearly, the TWAMP Light idea envisions many is requested here). Clearly, the TWAMP Light idea envisions many
components and communication capabilities beyond TWAMP-Test components and communication capabilities beyond TWAMP-Test
skipping to change at page 6, line 26 skipping to change at page 6, line 24
When considering privacy of those involved in measurement or those When considering privacy of those involved in measurement or those
whose traffic is measured, the sensitive information available to whose traffic is measured, the sensitive information available to
potential observers is greatly reduced when using active techniques potential observers is greatly reduced when using active techniques
which are within this scope of work. Passive observations of user which are within this scope of work. Passive observations of user
traffic for measurement purposes raise many privacy issues. We refer traffic for measurement purposes raise many privacy issues. We refer
the reader to the security and privacy considerations described in the reader to the security and privacy considerations described in
the Large Scale Measurement of Broadband Performance (LMAP) Framework the Large Scale Measurement of Broadband Performance (LMAP) Framework
[RFC7594], which covers both active and passive techniques. [RFC7594], which covers both active and passive techniques.
The registered UDP port as the Receiver Port for OWAMP/TWAMP-Test The registered UDP port as the Receiver Port for OWAMP/TWAMP-Test
could become a target of denial-of-service (DoS) or used to aid man- could become a target of denial-of-service (DoS), or used to aid man-
in-the-middle (MITM) attacks. To improve protection from the DoS in-the-middle (MITM) attacks. To improve protection from the DoS
following methods are recommended: following methods are recommended:
o filtering access to the OWAMP/TWAMP Receiver Port by access list; o filtering access to the OWAMP/TWAMP Receiver Port by access list;
o using a non-globally routable IP address for the OWAMP/TWAMP o using a non-globally routable IP address for the OWAMP/TWAMP
Session-Reflector address. Session-Reflector address.
A MITM attack may try to modify the content of the OWAMP/TWAMP-Test A MITM attack may try to modify the content of the OWAMP/TWAMP-Test
packets in order to alter the measurement results. However, an packets in order to alter the measurement results. However, an
implementation can use authenticated mode to detect modification of implementation can use authenticated mode to detect modification of
data. In addition, use encrypted mode to prevent eavesdropping and data. In addition, use encrypted mode to prevent eavesdropping and
un-detected modification of the OWAMP/TWAMP-Test packets. un-detected modification of the OWAMP/TWAMP-Test packets.
There is also a risk of a network under test giving special treatment
to flows involving the well-known UDP port, with or without knowing
source and destination addresses of measurement systems, and thus
biasing the results through preferential or detrimental processing.
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
This memo requests re-allocation of two UDP port numbers from the This memo requests re-allocation of two UDP port numbers from the
System Ports range [RFC6335]. Specifically, this memo requests that System Ports range [RFC6335]. Specifically, this memo requests that
IANA re-allocate UDP ports 861 and 862 as shown below, leaving the IANA re-allocate UDP ports 861 and 862 as shown below, leaving the
TCP port assignments as-is: TCP port assignments as-is:
+------------+-------+---------+----------------------+-------------+ +------------+-------+---------+----------------------+-------------+
| Service | Port | Transp. | Description | Reference | | Service | Port | Transp. | Description | Reference |
| Name | Num. | Protocol| | | | Name | Num. | Protocol| | |
 End of changes. 12 change blocks. 
20 lines changed or deleted 25 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/