Internet-Draft RDAP-IRR October 2026
Aggarwal, et al. Expires 2 May 2027 [Page]
Workgroup:
Internet Engineering Task Force
Internet-Draft:
draft-aggarwal-regext-rdap-irr-00
Published:
Intended Status:
Standards Track
Expires:
Authors:
M. Aggarwal
RIPE NCC
J. Singh
ARIN
A. Newton
ICANN
S. Romijn
Reliably Coded

RDAP Extension for Internet Routing Registry (IRR) Objects

Abstract

The Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) is used by Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) and Domain Name Registries (DNRs) to provide access to their resource registration information. The core specifications for RDAP define core object types, but they do not contain objects for the Internet Routing Registry (IRR). This document is intended to address this gap.

About This Document

This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.

The latest revision of this draft can be found at https://maggarwal13.github.io/rdap-irr-support/draft-aggarwal-regext-rdap-irr.html. Status information for this document may be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-aggarwal-regext-rdap-irr/.

Discussion of this document takes place on the regext Working Group mailing list (mailto:regext@ietf.org), which is archived at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/regext/. Subscribe at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext/.

Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at https://github.com/maggarwal13/rdap-irr-support.

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 2 May 2027.

▲

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

The Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) [RFC7480] is used by Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) and Domain Name Registries (DNRs) to provide access to their resource registration information. The core specifications for RDAP define core object types, but they do not contain objects for the Internet Routing Registry (IRR).

The IRR consists of several IRR Databases containing objects in the Routing Policy Specification Language (RPSL) [RFC2622] [RFC4012], such as route origins, sets of routes and autonomous systems, and routing policies. Network operators use this data to configure route filters, among other things. IRR Databases are commonly queried with the WHOIS protocol [RFC3912], which returns RPSL text.

Several RIRs operate IRR Databases alongside their registration databases, and already provide their other registration data through RDAP. Serving IRR objects through RDAP lets clients use one protocol for both, and relate IRR objects to the IP networks and autonomous system numbers they refer to.

This document defines RDAP object classes and lookups for IRR objects, so that IRR data is available in the same structured JSON format and over the same HTTPS transport as other RDAP data.

2. Conventions and Definitions

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.

Indentation and whitespace in examples are provided only to illustrate element relationships, and are not a required feature of this specification.

"..." in examples is used as shorthand for elements defined outside of this document, as well as to abbreviate elements that are too long.

To keep the examples short, entities in them only include the "objectClassName", "handle", and "roles" members.

3. Extension

This document defines a new RDAP extension with identifier "irr0", for accessing Internet Routing Registry (IRR) data through RDAP. This extension adheres to the guidelines in [I-D.ietf-regext-rdap-extensions]. New versions of this extension will use different extension identifiers.

4. Lookup Path Segment specification

Section 3.1 of [RFC9082] defines the simple lookup path segments for types: "ip", "autnum", "domain", "nameserver", and "entity".

This document aims to extend this to add following path segments:

5. The Route Object Class

It is the RDAP representation of the RPSL route class defined in Section 4 of [RFC2622]

Syntax: irr0_route/< IP prefix of the interAS route >/< AS that originates the route >

For example, the following URL would be used to find information describing route object

https://example.net/irr0_route/192.0.2.0/24/64500

The route object class can contain the following members:

The following is an example of the JSON object

{
  "objectClassName": "irr0_route",
  "handle": "192.0.2.0/24AS64500",
  "routeVersion": "v4",
  "origin": "64500",
  "route": "192.0.2.0/24",
  "pingable": [ "192.0.2.1" ],
  "holes": [ "192.0.2.64/26" ],
  "member-of": [ "RS-FOO", "RS-BAR" ],
  "remarks": [
    {
      "description": [
        "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
        "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "inject": [
    "upon HAVE-COMPONENTS {192.0.2.0/25, 192.0.2.128/25}"
  ],
  "aggregateMtd": "outbound AS-ANY",
  "aggregateBoundary": "AS64500 OR AS64501",
  "exportComps": "{192.0.2.128/26}",
  "components": "{192.0.2.0/24^-}",
  "entities": [
    {
      "objectClassName": "entity",
      "handle": "XXXX",
      "roles": [ "registrant" ]
    }
  ],
  "links": [
    {
      "value": "https://example.net/irr0_route/192.0.2.0/24/64500",
      "rel": "self",
      "href": "https://example.net/irr0_route/192.0.2.0/24/64500",
      "type": "application/rdap+json"
    }
  ],
  "events": [
    {
      "eventAction": "registration",
      "eventDate": "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
    },
    {
      "eventAction": "last changed",
      "eventDate": "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
    }
  ]
}

6. The SET Object Class

Section 5 of [RFC2622] defines SET objects. This section aims to represent SET classes in RDAP representation. Support for peering-set, rtr-set and filter-set is optional and may be provided at the discretion of the implementation.

6.1. Route Set Object Class

It is the RDAP representation of the RPSL route-set class defined in Section 5.2 of [RFC2622]

Syntax: irr0_routeSet/< name of the route set >

For example, the following URL would be used to find information describing route-set object

https://example.net/irr0_routeSet/RS-FOO

The routeSet object class can contain the following members:

The following is an example of a routeSet that might be served by an RIR.

{
  "objectClassName": "irr0_routeSet",
  "handle": "RS-FOO",
  "members": [ "192.0.2.0/24", "RS-BAR" ],
  "mp-members": [ "2001:db8::/32" ],
  "remarks": [
    {
      "description": [
        "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
        "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "entities": [
    {
      "objectClassName": "entity",
      "handle": "XXXX",
      "roles": [ "registrant" ]
    }
  ],
  "links": [
    {
      "value": "https://example.net/irr0_routeSet/RS-FOO",
      "rel": "self",
      "href": "https://example.net/irr0_routeSet/RS-FOO",
      "type": "application/rdap+json"
    }
  ],
  "events": [
    {
      "eventAction": "registration",
      "eventDate": "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
    },
    {
      "eventAction": "last changed",
      "eventDate": "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
    }
  ]
}

6.2. Autnum Set Object Class

It is the RDAP representation of the RPSL autnum-set class defined in Section 5.1 of [RFC2622]

Syntax: irr0_autnumSet/< name of the as-set >

For example, the following URL would be used to find information describing autnum-set object

https://example.net/irr0_autnumSet/AS-FOO

The autnumSet object class can contain the following members:

The following is an example of an autnumSet that might be served by an RIR.

{
  "objectClassName": "irr0_autnumSet",
  "handle": "AS-FOO",
  "members": [ "AS64501", "AS64502", "AS-BAR" ],
  "remarks": [
    {
      "description": [
        "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
        "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "entities": [
    {
      "objectClassName": "entity",
      "handle": "XXXX",
      "roles": [ "registrant" ]
    }
  ],
  "links": [
    {
      "value": "https://example.net/irr0_autnumSet/AS-FOO",
      "rel": "self",
      "href": "https://example.net/irr0_autnumSet/AS-FOO",
      "type": "application/rdap+json"
    }
  ],
  "events": [
    {
      "eventAction": "registration",
      "eventDate": "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
    },
    {
      "eventAction": "last changed",
      "eventDate": "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
    }
  ]
}

6.3. RTR Set Object Class

It is the RDAP representation of the RPSL rtr-set class defined in Section 5.5 of [RFC2622]

Syntax: irr0_rtrSet/< name of the router-set >

For example, the following URL would be used to find information describing rtrSet object

https://example.net/irr0_rtrSet/RTRS-FOO

The rtrSet set object class can contain the following members:

The following is an example of rtrSet that might be served by an RIR.

{
  "objectClassName": "irr0_rtrSet",
  "handle": "RTRS-FOO",
  "members": [ "rtr1.example.net", "rtr2.example.net" ],
  "mp-members": [ "2001:db8::1" ],
  "remarks": [
    {
      "description": [
        "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
        "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "entities": [
    {
      "objectClassName": "entity",
      "handle": "XXXX",
      "roles": [ "registrant" ]
    }
  ],
  "links": [
    {
      "value": "https://example.net/irr0_rtrSet/RTRS-FOO",
      "rel": "self",
      "href": "https://example.net/irr0_rtrSet/RTRS-FOO",
      "type": "application/rdap+json"
    }
  ],
  "events": [
    {
      "eventAction": "registration",
      "eventDate": "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
    },
    {
      "eventAction": "last changed",
      "eventDate": "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
    }
  ]
}

6.4. Peering Set Object Class

It is the RDAP representation of the RPSL peering-set class defined in Section 5.6 of [RFC2622]

Syntax: irr0_peeringSet/< name of the peering-set >

For example, the following URL would be used to find information describing peering-set object

https://example.net/irr0_peeringSet/PRNG-FOO

The peeringSet object class can contain the following members:

The following is an example of peeringSet that might be served by an RIR.

{
  "objectClassName": "irr0_peeringSet",
  "handle": "PRNG-FOO",
  "peering": [ "AS64501 at 198.51.100.1" ],
  "mp-peering": [ "AS64502 2001:db8::2 at 2001:db8::1" ],
  "remarks": [
    {
      "description": [
        "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
        "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "entities": [
    {
      "objectClassName": "entity",
      "handle": "XXXX",
      "roles": [ "registrant" ]
    }
  ],
  "links": [
    {
      "value": "https://example.net/irr0_peeringSet/PRNG-FOO",
      "rel": "self",
      "href": "https://example.net/irr0_peeringSet/PRNG-FOO",
      "type": "application/rdap+json"
    }
  ],
  "events": [
    {
      "eventAction": "registration",
      "eventDate": "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
    },
    {
      "eventAction": "last changed",
      "eventDate": "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
    }
  ]
}

6.5. Filter Set Object Class

It is the RDAP representation of the RPSL filter-set class defined in Section 5.4 of [RFC2622]

Syntax: irr0_filterSet/< name of the filter >

For example, the following URL would be used to find information describing filter object

https://example.net/irr0_filterSet/FLTR-FOO

The filterSet object class can contain the following members:

The following is an example of filterSet that might be served by an RIR.

{
  "objectClassName": "irr0_filterSet",
  "handle": "FLTR-FOO",
  "filter": [ "(AS64501 or FLTR-BAR) and <AS64502>" ],
  "mp-filter": [ "{2001:db8:100::/48^+}" ],
  "remarks": [
    {
      "description": [
        "She sells sea shells down by the sea shore.",
        "Originally written by Terry Sullivan."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "entities": [
    {
      "objectClassName": "entity",
      "handle": "XXXX",
      "roles": [ "registrant" ]
    }
  ],
  "links": [
    {
      "value": "https://example.net/irr0_filterSet/FLTR-FOO",
      "rel": "self",
      "href": "https://example.net/irr0_filterSet/FLTR-FOO",
      "type": "application/rdap+json"
    }
  ],
  "events": [
    {
      "eventAction": "registration",
      "eventDate": "1990-12-31T23:59:59Z"
    },
    {
      "eventAction": "last changed",
      "eventDate": "1991-12-31T23:59:59Z"
    }
  ]
}

7. Autnum Route Policies

Section 3.1.2 of [RFC9082] defines the lookup for autnum objects. The returned autnum object May include an "irr0_policies" member. "irr0_policies" is an optional member and must be an array, the order of the objects in the array is to be observed during processing.

"irr0_policies" can contain following object member and each of them is a string containing a value as specified by RPSL:

An example "irr0_policies" data structure:

{
  "irr0_policies": [
    {
      "import-via": "AS64500 from AS-ANY EXCEPT (AS64500 AND AS64501) accept ANY"
    },
    {
      "export-via": "AS64500 to AS-ANY EXCEPT (AS64500 AND AS64501) announce AS-BAR"
    }
  ]
}

8. RDAP Conformance

A server that supports the functionality specified in this document MUST include the "irr0" string literal in the "rdapConformance" array (Section 4.1 of [RFC9083]) of any response containing an object class or member defined in this document, as well as in the help response.

9. Privacy Considerations

The lookups defined in this document may affect the privacy of entities in the registry (and elsewhere) in various ways: see [RFC6973] for a general treatment of privacy in protocol specifications, and Section 4 of [RFC7481] for specific discussion about privacy threats with respect to the registration data provided by RDAP. Server operators should be aware of the tradeoffs that result from implementation of this functionality.

Many jurisdictions have laws or regulations that restrict the use of "Personal Data", per the definition in Section 3.2 of [RFC6973]. Given that, server operators should ascertain whether the regulatory environment in which they operate permits implementation of the functionality defined in this document.

10. Security Considerations

[RFC7481] describes security requirements and considerations for RDAP generally. Additionally, guidance as to the use of TLS has changed since that document was published: see [BCP195] for further detail.

Section 8 of [RFC9082] includes security considerations relating to object retrieval in RDAP. Those considerations are relevant here as well.

11. IANA Considerations

IANA is requested to register the following value in the "RDAP Extensions" registry at [RDAP-EXTENSIONS]:

12. References

12.1. Normative References

[I-D.ietf-regext-rdap-extensions]
Newton, A., Singh, J., and T. Harrison, "RDAP Extensions", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-regext-rdap-extensions-17, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-regext-rdap-extensions-17>.
[RFC2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
[RFC2622]
Alaettinoglu, C., Villamizar, C., Gerich, E., Kessens, D., Meyer, D., Bates, T., Karrenberg, D., and M. Terpstra, "Routing Policy Specification Language (RPSL)", RFC 2622, DOI 10.17487/RFC2622, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2622>.
[RFC4012]
Blunk, L., Damas, J., Parent, F., and A. Robachevsky, "Routing Policy Specification Language next generation (RPSLng)", RFC 4012, DOI 10.17487/RFC4012, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4012>.
[RFC5943]
Haberman, B., Ed., "A Dedicated Routing Policy Specification Language Interface Identifier for Operational Testing", RFC 5943, DOI 10.17487/RFC5943, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5943>.
[RFC7480]
Newton, A., Ellacott, B., and N. Kong, "HTTP Usage in the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95, RFC 7480, DOI 10.17487/RFC7480, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7480>.
[RFC8174]
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.
[RFC9082]
Hollenbeck, S. and A. Newton, "Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Query Format", STD 95, RFC 9082, DOI 10.17487/RFC9082, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9082>.
[RFC9083]
Hollenbeck, S. and A. Newton, "JSON Responses for the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95, RFC 9083, DOI 10.17487/RFC9083, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9083>.

12.2. Informative References

[BCP195]
Best Current Practice 195, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp195>.
At the time of writing, this BCP comprises the following:
Moriarty, K. and S. Farrell, "Deprecating TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1", BCP 195, RFC 8996, DOI 10.17487/RFC8996, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8996>.
Sheffer, Y., Saint-Andre, P., and T. Fossati, "Recommendations for Secure Use of Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS)", BCP 195, RFC 9325, DOI 10.17487/RFC9325, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9325>.
[I-D.ietf-grow-rpsl-via]
Snijders, J., "The "import-via" and "export-via" attributes in RPSL Policy Specifications", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-grow-rpsl-via-01, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-grow-rpsl-via-01>.
[RDAP-EXTENSIONS]
IANA, "RDAP Extensions", n.d., <https://www.iana.org/assignments/rdap-extensions/>.
[RFC3912]
Daigle, L., "WHOIS Protocol Specification", RFC 3912, DOI 10.17487/RFC3912, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3912>.
[RFC6973]
Cooper, A., Tschofenig, H., Aboba, B., Peterson, J., Morris, J., Hansen, M., and R. Smith, "Privacy Considerations for Internet Protocols", RFC 6973, DOI 10.17487/RFC6973, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6973>.
[RFC7481]
Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", STD 95, RFC 7481, DOI 10.17487/RFC7481, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7481>.

Acknowledgments

TODO acknowledge.

Authors' Addresses

Mahesh Aggarwal
RIPE NCC
Jasdip Singh
ARIN
Andy Newton
ICANN
Sasha Romijn
Reliably Coded