RFC 9748: Updating the NTP Registries
- R. Salz
Abstract
The Network Time Protocol (NTP) and Network Time Security (NTS) documents define a number of registries, collectively called the NTP registries.¶
Some registries are correct, but some include incorrect assignments and some don't follow common practice. For the sake of completeness, this document reviews all NTP and NTS registries, and corrects the registries where necessary.¶
This document updates RFCs 5905, 5906, 7821, 7822, and 8573.¶
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://
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://
1. Introduction
The Network Time Protocol (NTP) and Network Time Security (NTS) documents
define a number of registries, collectively called the NTP
registries.
The NTP registries can all be found at
<https://
Some registries are correct, but some include incorrect assignments and some don't follow common practice. For the sake of completeness, this document reviews all NTP and NTS registries, and corrects the registries where necessary.¶
The bulk of this document can be divided into two parts:¶
2. Existing Registries
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.¶
2.1. Reference ID and Kiss-o'-Death Registries
[RFC5905] defines two registries: "NTP Reference Identifier Codes" in Section 7.3 and the "NTP Kiss-o'-Death Codes" in Section 7.4. Reference identifiers and kiss codes can be up to 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 registries were created per Section 16 of [RFC5905].¶
2.2. Extension Field Types
Section 7.5 of [RFC5905] defines the on-the-wire format of extension fields but does not create a registry for them.¶
Section 13 of [RFC5906] mentions the "NTP Extension Field Types" registry, and defines it indirectly by defining 30 extensions (10 each for request, response, and error response). It does not provide a formal definition of the columns in the registry. Section 10 of [RFC5906] splits the Field Type into four subfields, only for use within the Autokey extensions.¶
[RFC7821] adds a new entry, Checksum Complement, to the "NTP Extension Field Types" registry.¶
[RFC7822] clarifies the processing rules for Extension Field Types, particularly around the interaction with the Message Authentication Code (MAC) field. NTPv4 packets may contain a MAC that appears where one would expect the next extension field header.¶
[RFC8573] changes the cryptography used in the MAC field.¶
[RFC8915] adds four new entries to the "NTP Extension Field Types" registry.¶
The following problems exist with the current registry:¶
2.3. Network Time Security Registries
[RFC8915] defines the NTS protocol. The related registries are listed here for completeness, but there are no changes specified in this document.¶
Sections 7.1 through 7.5 (inclusive) added entries to existing registries.¶
Section 7.6 created the "Network Time Security Key Establishment Record Types" registry that partitions the range into three different registration policies: IETF Review, Specification Required, and Private or Experimental Use.¶
Section 7.7 created the "Network Time Security Next Protocols" registry that similarly partitions the range.¶
Section 7.8 created the "Network Time Security Error Codes" and "Network Time Security Warning Codes" registries. Both registries are partitioned the same way.¶
3. NTP Registry Updates
The following general guidelines apply to the NTP registries:¶
3.1. Designated Experts
The IESG is requested to choose three designated experts (DEs), with approvals from two being required to implement a change. Guidance for the experts is given below.¶
The DEs should be familiar with [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.¶
In addition, the DE is expected to be familiar with this document, specifically the history documented here.¶
4. IANA Considerations
Each entry described in the subsections below is intended to completely replace the existing entry with the same name.¶
4.1. NTP Reference Identifier Codes
The registration procedure has been changed to Specification Required and this document has been added as a reference.¶
The Note has been changed to read as follows:¶
Codes beginning with the character "X" are reserved for experimentation and development. IANA cannot assign them.¶
The columns are defined as follows:¶
- ID (required):
- a four-byte value padded on the right with all-bits-zero. Each byte other than padding must be ASCII uppercase letters or digits.¶
- Clock source (required):
- a brief text description of the ID.¶
- Reference (required):
- the publication defining the ID.¶
The existing entries are left unchanged.¶
4.2. NTP Kiss-o'-Death Codes
The registration procedure is changed to Specification Required and this document has been added as a reference.¶
The Note has been changed to read as follows:¶
Codes beginning with the character "X" are reserved for experimentation and development. IANA cannot assign them.¶
The columns are defined as follows:¶
- ID (required):
- a four-byte value padded on the right with all-bits-zero. Each byte other than padding must be ASCII uppercase letters or digits.¶
- Meaning source (required):
- a brief text description of the ID.¶
- Reference (required):
- the publication defining the ID.¶
The existing entries are left unchanged.¶
4.3. NTP Extension Field Types
The registration procedure has been changed to Specification Required and [RFC5906] and this document have been added as references.¶
The following two Notes have been added:¶
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.¶
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.¶
The columns are defined as follows:¶
- Field Type (required):
- a two-byte value in hexadecimal.¶
- Meaning (required):
- a brief text description of the field type.¶
- Reference (required):
- the publication defining the field type.¶
IANA has updated the registry as shown in Table 1.¶
5. Security Considerations
This document adds no new security considerations, as they are defined in the document that defines the extension. See the References column of the appropriate IANA registry.¶
6. Normative References
- [RFC5905]
-
Mills, D., Martin, J., Ed., Burbank, J., and W. Kasch, "Network Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms Specification", RFC 5905, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC5905 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5905 - [RFC5906]
-
Haberman, B., Ed. and D. Mills, "Network Time Protocol Version 4: Autokey Specification", RFC 5906, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC5906 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5906 - [RFC7821]
-
Mizrahi, T., "UDP Checksum Complement in the Network Time Protocol (NTP)", RFC 7821, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7821 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7821 - [RFC7822]
-
Mizrahi, T. and D. Mayer, "Network Time Protocol Version 4 (NTPv4) Extension Fields", RFC 7822, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7822 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7822 - [RFC8126]
-
Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 8126, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8126 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8126 - [RFC8573]
-
Malhotra, A. and S. Goldberg, "Message Authentication Code for the Network Time Protocol", RFC 8573, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8573 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8573 - [RFC8915]
-
Franke, D., Sibold, D., Teichel, K., Dansarie, M., and R. Sundblad, "Network Time Security for the Network Time Protocol", RFC 8915, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8915 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8915
Acknowledgements
The members of the NTP Working Group helped a great deal. Notable contributors include:¶