2.3.8 Host Identity Protocol (hip)

NOTE: This charter is a snapshot of the 64th IETF Meeting in Vancouver, British Columbia Canada. It may now be out-of-date.
In addition to this official charter maintained by the IETF Secretariat, there is additional information about this working group on the Web at:

       Additional HIP Web Page

Last Modified: 2005-10-05


David Ward <dward@cisco.com>
Gonzalo Camarillo <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com>

Internet Area Director(s):

Mark Townsley <townsley@cisco.com>
Margaret Wasserman <margaret@thingmagic.com>

Internet Area Advisor:

Margaret Wasserman <margaret@thingmagic.com>

Mailing Lists:

General Discussion: hipsec@ietf.org
To Subscribe: hipsec-request@ietf.org
In Body: In Body: subscribe
Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hipsec/index.html

Description of Working Group:

The Host Identity Protocol (HIP) provides a method of
separating the end-point identifier and locator roles of
IP addresses. It introduces a new Host Identity (HI)
name space, based on public keys. The public keys are
typically, but not necessarily, self generated.

The specifications for the architecture and protocol
details for these mechanisms consist of:

        draft-moskowitz-hip-arch-05.txt (at RFC editor) and
        draft-moskowitz-hip-08.txt (soon -09.txt)

There are five publicly known, interoperating
implementations, some of which are open source.

Currently, the HIP base protocol works well with any pair
of co-operating end-hosts. However, to be more useful
and more widely deployable, HIP needs some support from
the existing infrastructure, including the DNS, and a new
piece of infrastructure, called the HIP rendezvous

| The purpose of this Working Group is to define the    |
| minimal infrastructure elements that are needed for  |
| HIP experimentation on a wide scale.                  |

In particular, the objective of this working group is to
complete the base protocol specification, define one or
more DNS resource records for storing HIP related data,
to complete the existing work on basic mobility and
multi-homing, and produce Experimental RFCs for these.

Note that even though the specifications are chartered
for Experimental, it is understood that their quality and
security properties should match the standards track
requirements. The main purpose for producing
Experimental documents instead of standards track ones
are the unknown effects that the mechanisms may have on
applications and on the Internet in the large.

It is expected that there will be a roughly parallel,
though perhaps considerably broader, IRTF Research Group
that will include efforts both on developing the more
forward looking aspects of the HIP architecture and on
exploring the effects that HIP may have on the applications
and the Internet.

The following are charter items for the working group:

1) Complete the HIP base protocol specification.
  Starting point: draft-moskowitz-hip-08.txt (or newer)

2) Complete the basic mobility and multi-homing support for HIP.
  Starting point: draft-nikander-hip-mm-01.txt (or newer)

While this work partially overlaps the work in Mobile
IP and Multi6 Working Groups, it is very different in
the sense that is based on the Experimental HIP
specification, and cannot function without it.

3) Define one or more new DNS Resource Records for
  storing HIP related data, such as Host Identifiers and
  Host Identity Tags (HITs). This task explicitly
  excludes the task of defining reverse DNS entries
  based on HITs.

4) Define a basic HIP rendezvous mechanism.

  A basic HIP rendezvous server allows mobile and
  non-mobile HIP hosts to register their current IP
  addresses at the server. Other hosts can then send
  the initial I1 packets to the rendezvous server, which
  forwards the packets to the HIP host's current address.

  This task explicitly excludes solving more general
  problems, such as the referral problem. Also excluded
  is the problem of finding the right rendezvous server.
  It is expected that the DNS records will be used for that.

  The Working Group bases all the work on the HIP achitecture
  specification (as defined above).

5) Complete the HIP Architecture specification
  Starting point: draft-moskowitz-hip-arch-06.txt

Goals and Milestones:

Done  First version of the HIP basic mobility and multi-homing mechanism specification.
Done  First version of the HIP DNS resource record(s) specification.
Done  First version of the HIP basic rendezvous mechanism specification.
Done  WGLC on the HIP architecture specification
Done  Submit the HIP architecture specification to the IESG
Done  WG LC on the base protocol specification
Done  WG LC on the ESP usage specification
Oct 2005  WGLC the HIP registration extensions specification
Oct 2005  WGLC the HIP DNS resource record(s) specification
Oct 2005  WG LC on the basic HIP rendezvous mechanism specification.
Nov 2005  Submit the ESP usage specification to the IESG for Experimental
Nov 2005  Submit the base protocol specification to the IESG for Experimental
Nov 2005  WG LC on the HIP basic mobility and multi-homing specification.
Dec 2005  Submit the HIP registration extensions specification for Experimental
Dec 2005  Submit the HIP DNS resource record(s) specification to the IESG for Experimental.
Dec 2005  Submit the HIP basic mobility and multihoming specification to the IESG for Experimental.
Dec 2005  Submit the basic HIP rendezvous mechanism specification to the IESG for Experimental.
Jan 2006  Recharter or close the WG.


  • draft-ietf-hip-base-04.txt
  • draft-ietf-hip-arch-03.txt
  • draft-ietf-hip-mm-02.txt
  • draft-ietf-hip-dns-03.txt
  • draft-ietf-hip-rvs-04.txt
  • draft-ietf-hip-esp-01.txt
  • draft-ietf-hip-registration-00.txt

    No Request For Comments

    Current Meeting Report

    Minutes HIP WG at IETF 64
    Minutes edited by Gonzalo Camarillo
    Based on notes by Andrew McGregor
    Meeting chaired by Gonzalo Camarillo and David Ward
    Slides presented included in the proceedings
    TUESDAY, November 8, 2005, 1510-1710
    Topic: Agenda Bash
    Discussions led by: Chairs
    The architecture draft was approved and is in the RFC Editor's queue.
    The base spec and the ESP draft will be going to publication request
    soon.  Remaining drafts have been already WG last called. Only the DNS
    draft had significant comments.
    The mobility and multihoming draft should be ready for last call
    before Dallas.
    The WG is ahead of schedule at present, aside from MM. we are in a
    good shape in general.
    Topic: Base Spec and ESP
    Discussion led by: Petri Jokela
    Relevant documents:
    The chairs will be requesting the publication of both drafts shortly.
    Topic: Rendezvous
    Discussion led by: Julien Laganier
    Relevant documents:
    This draft is ready for publication request.
    Topic: Registration
    Discussion led by: Julien Laganier
    Relevant documents:
    A few WGLC comments: extensibility of registration should be explicit,
    establishing credentials is out-of-scope, and clarifications regarding
    UPDATEs are needed.
    Topic: DNS
    Discussion led by: Julien Laganier
    Relevant documents:
    Introduction will be shortened and the draft will move forward with a
    single record. The draft may need to be reviewed by the DNS area again.
    Topic: Mobility and Multihoming
    Discussion led by: Pekka Nikander
    Relevant documents:
    The draft is mostly waiting for implementation experience to check
    clarity. The plan is to to perform some interop tests before Dallas,
    post new draft within a month, and WG last call shortly after.
    Jari Arkko will send some text to the list on when to trigger
    readressing and on NAT traversal.
    Topic: Rechartering Discussions
    Discussion led by: Chairs
    A few topics had been proposed on the mailing list: NAT, native API,
    invisible HIP (using IP addresses as ULIDs), SIP
    interactions. Additionally topics were proposed during the meeting:
    tracking shim6, HIP as an end-to-end solution over middleboxes,
    considerations for application writers.
    There was consensus among the group that the work on NAT seems
    The chairs will come up with a charter proposal and send it to the
    mailing list.
    The meeting ended.


    Chair Slides
    Base and ESP
    Mobility and Multihoming