< draft-ietf-hip-rfc5205-bis-07.txt   draft-ietf-hip-rfc5205-bis-10.txt >
Network Working Group J. Laganier Network Working Group J. Laganier
Internet-Draft Luminate Wireless, Inc. Internet-Draft Luminate Wireless, Inc.
Obsoletes: 5205 (if approved) June 10, 2015 Obsoletes: 5205 (if approved) August 4, 2016
Intended status: Standards Track Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: December 12, 2015 Expires: February 5, 2017
Host Identity Protocol (HIP) Domain Name System (DNS) Extension Host Identity Protocol (HIP) Domain Name System (DNS) Extension
draft-ietf-hip-rfc5205-bis-07 draft-ietf-hip-rfc5205-bis-10
Abstract Abstract
This document specifies a new resource record (RR) for the Domain This document specifies a resource record (RR) for the Domain Name
Name System (DNS), and how to use it with the Host Identity Protocol System (DNS), and how to use it with the Host Identity Protocol
(HIP). This RR allows a HIP node to store in the DNS its Host (HIP). This RR allows a HIP node to store in the DNS its Host
Identity (HI, the public component of the node public-private key Identity (HI, the public component of the node public-private key
pair), Host Identity Tag (HIT, a truncated hash of its public key), pair), Host Identity Tag (HIT, a truncated hash of its public key),
and the Domain Names of its rendezvous servers (RVSs). This document and the Domain Names of its rendezvous servers (RVSs). This document
obsoletes RFC5205. obsoletes RFC5205.
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.
skipping to change at page 1, line 37 skipping to change at page 1, line 37
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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://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 December 12, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on February 5, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2016 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://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
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Usage Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Usage Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Simple Static Single Homed End-Host . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1. Simple Static Single Homed End-Host . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Mobile end-host . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2. Mobile end-host . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Overview of Using the DNS with HIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. Overview of Using the DNS with HIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1. Storing HI, HIT, and RVS in the DNS . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.1. Storing HI, HIT, and RVS in the DNS . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2. Initiating Connections Based on DNS Names . . . . . . . . 8 4.2. Initiating Connections Based on DNS Names . . . . . . . . 8
5. HIP RR Storage Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5. HIP RR Storage Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.1. HIT Length Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.1. HIT Length Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.2. PK Algorithm Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.2. PK Algorithm Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.3. PK Length Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.3. PK Length Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.4. HIT Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.4. HIT Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.5. Public Key Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.5. Public Key Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.6. Rendezvous Servers Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.6. Rendezvous Servers Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. HIP RR Presentation Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6. HIP RR Presentation Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.1. Attacker Tampering with an Insecure HIP RR . . . . . . . 13 8.1. Attacker Tampering with an Insecure HIP RR . . . . . . . 13
8.2. Hash and HITs Collisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 8.2. Hash and HITs Collisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8.3. DNSSEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8.3. DNSSEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
10. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 10. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
12.1. Normative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 12.1. Normative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
12.2. Informative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 12.2. Informative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Appendix A. Changes from RFC 5205 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Appendix A. Changes from RFC 5205 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document specifies a new resource record (RR) for the Domain This document specifies a resource record (RR) for the Domain Name
Name System (DNS) [RFC1034], and how to use it with the Host Identity System (DNS) [RFC1034], and how to use it with the Host Identity
Protocol (HIP) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis]. This RR allows a HIP node Protocol (HIP) [RFC7401]. This RR allows a HIP node to store in the
to store in the DNS its Host Identity (HI, the public component of DNS its Host Identity (HI, the public component of the node public-
the node public-private key pair), Host Identity Tag (HIT, a private key pair), Host Identity Tag (HIT, a truncated hash of its
truncated hash of its HI), and the Domain Names of its rendezvous HI), and the Domain Names of its rendezvous servers (RVSs)
servers (RVSs) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis]. [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis].
Currently, most of the Internet applications that need to communicate Currently, most of the Internet applications that need to communicate
with a remote host first translate a domain name (often obtained via with a remote host first translate a domain name (often obtained via
user input) into one or more IP address(es). This step occurs prior user input) into one or more IP addresses. This step occurs prior to
to communication with the remote host, and relies on a DNS lookup. communication with the remote host, and relies on a DNS lookup.
With HIP, IP addresses are intended to be used mostly for on-the-wire With HIP, IP addresses are intended to be used mostly for on-the-wire
communication between end hosts, while most Upper Layer Protocols communication between end hosts, while most Upper Layer Protocols
(ULP) and applications use HIs or HITs instead (ICMP might be an (ULP) and applications use HIs or HITs instead (ICMP might be an
example of an ULP not using them). Consequently, we need a means to example of an ULP not using them). Consequently, we need a means to
translate a domain name into an HI. Using the DNS for this translate a domain name into an HI. Using the DNS for this
translation is pretty straightforward: We define a new HIP resource translation is pretty straightforward: We define a HIP resource
record. Upon query by an application or ULP for a name to IP address record. Upon query by an application or ULP for a name to IP address
lookup, the resolver would then additionally perform a name to HI lookup, the resolver would then additionally perform a name to HI
lookup, and use it to construct the resulting HI to IP address lookup, and use it to construct the resulting HI to IP address
mapping (which is internal to the HIP layer). The HIP layer uses the mapping (which is internal to the HIP layer). The HIP layer uses the
HI to IP address mapping to translate HIs and HITs into IP addresses HI to IP address mapping to translate HIs and HITs into IP addresses
and vice versa. and vice versa.
The HIP specification [RFC7401] specifies the HIP base exchange
between a HIP Initiator and a HIP Responder based on a four-way
handshake involving a total of four HIP packets (I1, R1, I2, and R2).
Since the HIP packets contain both the Initiator and the Responder
HIT, the initiator needs to have knowledge of the Responder's HI and
HIT prior to initiating the base exchange by sending an I1 packet..
The HIP Rendezvous Extension [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis] allows a HIP The HIP Rendezvous Extension [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis] allows a HIP
node to be reached via the IP address(es) of a third party, the node to be reached via the IP address(es) of a third party, the
node's rendezvous server (RVS). An Initiator willing to establish a node's rendezvous server (RVS). An Initiator willing to establish a
HIP association with a Responder served by an RVS would typically HIP association with a Responder served by an RVS would typically
initiate a HIP exchange by sending an I1 towards the RVS IP address initiate a HIP base exchange by sending the I1 packet initiating the
rather than towards the Responder IP address. Consequently, we need exchange towards the RVS IP address rather than towards the Responder
a means to find the name of a rendezvous server for a given host IP address. Consequently, we need a means to find the name of a
name. rendezvous server for a given host name.
This document introduces the new HIP DNS resource record to store the This document introduces the HIP DNS resource record to store the
Rendezvous Server (RVS), Host Identity (HI), and Host Identity Tag Rendezvous Server (RVS), Host Identity (HI), and Host Identity Tag
(HIT) information. (HIT) information.
2. Conventions Used in This Document 2. Conventions Used in This Document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
3. Usage Scenarios 3. Usage Scenarios
skipping to change at page 4, line 23 skipping to change at page 4, line 30
of rendezvous servers (RVS) through HIP RRs. of rendezvous servers (RVS) through HIP RRs.
The HIP RR is class independent. The HIP RR is class independent.
When a HIP node wants to initiate communication with another HIP When a HIP node wants to initiate communication with another HIP
node, it first needs to perform a HIP base exchange to set up a HIP node, it first needs to perform a HIP base exchange to set up a HIP
association towards its peer. Although such an exchange can be association towards its peer. Although such an exchange can be
initiated opportunistically, i.e., without prior knowledge of the initiated opportunistically, i.e., without prior knowledge of the
Responder's HI, by doing so both nodes knowingly risk man-in-the- Responder's HI, by doing so both nodes knowingly risk man-in-the-
middle attacks on the HIP exchange. To prevent these attacks, it is middle attacks on the HIP exchange. To prevent these attacks, it is
recommended that the Initiator first obtain the HI of the Responder, recommended that the Initiator first obtains the HI of the Responder,
and then initiate the exchange. This can be done, for example, and then initiates the exchange. This can be done, for example,
through manual configuration or DNS lookups. Hence, a new HIP RR is through manual configuration or DNS lookups. Hence, a HIP RR is
introduced. introduced.
When a HIP node is frequently changing its IP address(es), the When a HIP node is frequently changing its IP address(es), the
natural DNS latency for propagating changes may prevent it from natural DNS latency for propagating changes may prevent it from
publishing its new IP address(es) in the DNS. For solving this publishing its new IP address(es) in the DNS. For solving this
problem, the HIP Architecture [RFC4423] introduces rendezvous servers problem, the HIP Architecture [RFC4423] introduces rendezvous servers
(RVSs) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis]. A HIP host uses a rendezvous (RVSs) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis]. A HIP host uses a rendezvous
server as a rendezvous point to maintain reachability with possible server as a rendezvous point to maintain reachability with possible
HIP initiators while moving [RFC5206]. Such a HIP node would publish HIP Initiators while moving [RFC5206]. Such a HIP node would publish
in the DNS its RVS domain name(s) in a HIP RR, while keeping its RVS in the DNS its RVS domain name(s) in a HIP RR, while keeping its RVS
up-to-date with its current set of IP addresses. up-to-date with its current set of IP addresses.
When a HIP node wants to initiate a HIP exchange with a Responder, it When a HIP node wants to initiate a HIP exchange with a Responder, it
will perform a number of DNS lookups. Depending on the type of will perform a number of DNS lookups. Depending on the type of
implementation, the order in which those lookups will be issued may implementation, the order in which those lookups will be issued may
vary. For instance, implementations using HIT in APIs may typically vary. For instance, implementations using HIT in Application
first query for HIP resource records at the Responder FQDN, while Programming Interfaces (APIs) may typically first query for HIP
those using an IP address in APIs may typically first query for A resource records at the Responder FQDN, while those using an IP
and/or AAAA resource records. address in APIs may typically first query for A and/or AAAA resource
records.
In the following, we assume that the Initiator first queries for HIP In the following, we assume that the Initiator first queries for HIP
resource records at the Responder FQDN. resource records at the Responder FQDN.
If the query for the HIP type was responded to with a DNS answer with If the query for the HIP type was responded to with a DNS answer with
RCODE=3 (Name Error), then the Responder's information is not present RCODE=3 (Name Error), then the Responder's information is not present
in the DNS and further queries for the same owner name SHOULD NOT be in the DNS and further queries for the same owner name SHOULD NOT be
made. made.
In case the query for the HIP records returned a DNS answer with In case the query for the HIP records returned a DNS answer with
skipping to change at page 5, line 22 skipping to change at page 5, line 30
Depending on the combinations of answers, the situations described in Depending on the combinations of answers, the situations described in
Section 3.1 and Section 3.2 can occur. Section 3.1 and Section 3.2 can occur.
Note that storing HIP RR information in the DNS at an FQDN that is Note that storing HIP RR information in the DNS at an FQDN that is
assigned to a non-HIP node might have ill effects on its reachability assigned to a non-HIP node might have ill effects on its reachability
by HIP nodes. by HIP nodes.
3.1. Simple Static Single Homed End-Host 3.1. Simple Static Single Homed End-Host
A HIP node (R) with a single static network attachment, wishing to be In addition to its IP address(es) (IP-R), a HIP node (R) with a
reachable by reference to its FQDN (www.example.com), would store in single static network attachment that wishes to be reachable by
the DNS, in addition to its IP address(es) (IP-R), its Host Identity reference to its FQDN (www.example.com) to act as a Responder would
(HI-R) and Host Identity Tag (HIT-R) in a HIP resource record. store in the DNS a HIP resource record containing its Host Identity
(HI-R) and Host Identity Tag (HIT-R).
An Initiator willing to associate with a node would typically issue An Initiator willing to associate with a node would typically issue
the following queries: the following queries:
o QNAME=www.example.com, QTYPE=HIP o Query #1: QNAME=www.example.com, QTYPE=HIP
o (QCLASS=IN is assumed and omitted from the examples) (QCLASS=IN is assumed and omitted from the examples)
Which returns a DNS packet with RCODE=0 and one or more HIP RRs with Which returns a DNS packet with RCODE=0 and one or more HIP RRs with
the HIT and HI (e.g., HIT-R and HI-R) of the Responder in the answer the HIT and HI (e.g., HIT-R and HI-R) of the Responder in the answer
section, but no RVS. section, but no RVS.
o QNAME=www.example.com, QTYPE=A QNAME=www.example.com, QTYPE=AAAA o Query #2: QNAME=www.example.com, QTYPE=A
Which returns DNS packets with RCODE=0 and one or more A or AAAA RRs o Query #3: QNAME=www.example.com, QTYPE=AAAA
containing IP address(es) of the Responder (e.g., IP-R) in the answer Which would return DNS packets with RCODE=0 and respectively one or
section. more A or AAAA RRs containing IP address(es) of the Responder (e.g.,
IP-R) in their answer sections.
Caption: In the remainder of this document, for the sake of keeping Caption: In the remainder of this document, for the sake of keeping
diagrams simple and concise, several DNS queries and answers diagrams simple and concise, several DNS queries and answers
are represented as one single transaction, while in fact are represented as one single transaction, while in fact
there are several queries and answers flowing back and there are several queries and answers flowing back and
forth, as described in the textual examples. forth, as described in the textual examples.
[HIP? A? ] [HIP? A? ]
[www.example.com] +-----+ [www.example.com] +-----+
+-------------------------------->| | +-------------------------------->| |
skipping to change at page 6, line 45 skipping to change at page 6, line 48
A mobile HIP node (R) wishing to be reachable by reference to its A mobile HIP node (R) wishing to be reachable by reference to its
FQDN (www.example.com) would store in the DNS, possibly in addition FQDN (www.example.com) would store in the DNS, possibly in addition
to its IP address(es) (IP-R), its HI (HI-R), HIT (HIT-R), and the to its IP address(es) (IP-R), its HI (HI-R), HIT (HIT-R), and the
domain name(s) of its rendezvous server(s) (e.g., rvs.example.com) in domain name(s) of its rendezvous server(s) (e.g., rvs.example.com) in
HIP resource record(s). The mobile HIP node also needs to notify its HIP resource record(s). The mobile HIP node also needs to notify its
rendezvous servers of any change in its set of IP address(es). rendezvous servers of any change in its set of IP address(es).
An Initiator willing to associate with such a mobile node would An Initiator willing to associate with such a mobile node would
typically issue the following queries: typically issue the following queries:
o QNAME=www.example.com, QTYPE=HIP o Query #1: QNAME=www.example.com, QTYPE=HIP
Which returns a DNS packet with RCODE=0 and one or more HIP RRs with Which returns a DNS packet with RCODE=0 and one or more HIP RRs with
the HIT, HI, and RVS domain name(s) (e.g., HIT-R, HI-R, and the HIT, HI, and RVS domain name(s) (e.g., HIT-R, HI-R, and
rvs.example.com) of the Responder in the answer section. rvs.example.com) of the Responder in the answer section.
o QNAME=rvs.example.com, QTYPE=A QNAME=www.example.com, QTYPE=AAAA o Query #2: QNAME=rvs.example.com, QTYPE=A
Which returns DNS packets with RCODE=0 and one or more A or AAAA RRs
containing IP address(es) of the Responder's RVS (e.g., IP-RVS) in o Query #3: QNAME=rvs.example.com, QTYPE=AAAA
the answer section.
Which return DNS packets with RCODE=0 and respectively one or more A
or AAAA RRs containing IP address(es) of the Responder's RVS (e.g.,
IP-RVS) in their answer sections.
[HIP? ] [HIP? ]
[www.example.com] [www.example.com]
[A? ] [A? ]
[rvs.example.com] +-----+ [rvs.example.com] +-----+
+----------------------------------------->| | +----------------------------------------->| |
| | DNS | | | DNS |
| +----------------------------------------| | | +----------------------------------------| |
| | [HIP? ] +-----+ | | [HIP? ] +-----+
skipping to change at page 8, line 6 skipping to change at page 8, line 14
4. Overview of Using the DNS with HIP 4. Overview of Using the DNS with HIP
4.1. Storing HI, HIT, and RVS in the DNS 4.1. Storing HI, HIT, and RVS in the DNS
For any HIP node, its Host Identity (HI), the associated Host For any HIP node, its Host Identity (HI), the associated Host
Identity Tag (HIT), and the FQDN of its possible RVSs can be stored Identity Tag (HIT), and the FQDN of its possible RVSs can be stored
in a DNS HIP RR. Any conforming implementation may store a Host in a DNS HIP RR. Any conforming implementation may store a Host
Identity (HI) and its associated Host Identity Tag (HIT) in a DNS HIP Identity (HI) and its associated Host Identity Tag (HIT) in a DNS HIP
RDATA format. HI and HIT are defined in Section 3 of the HIP RDATA format. HI and HIT are defined in Section 3 of the HIP
specification [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis]. specification [RFC7401].
Upon return of a HIP RR, a host MUST always calculate the HI- Upon return of a HIP RR, a host MUST always calculate the HI-
derivative HIT to be used in the HIP exchange, as specified in derivative HIT to be used in the HIP exchange, as specified in
Section 3 of the HIP specification [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis], while Section 3 of the HIP specification [RFC7401], while the HIT possibly
the HIT possibly embedded along SHOULD only be used as an embedded along SHOULD only be used as an optimization (e.g., table
optimization (e.g., table lookup). lookup).
The HIP resource record may also contain one or more domain name(s) The HIP resource record may also contain one or more domain name(s)
of rendezvous server(s) towards which HIP I1 packets might be sent to of rendezvous server(s) towards which HIP I1 packets might be sent to
trigger the establishment of an association with the entity named by trigger the establishment of an association with the entity named by
this resource record [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis]. this resource record [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis].
The rendezvous server field of the HIP resource record stored at a The rendezvous server field of the HIP resource record stored at a
given owner name MAY include the owner name itself. A semantically given owner name MAY include the owner name itself. A semantically
equivalent situation occurs if no rendezvous server is present in the equivalent situation occurs if no rendezvous server is present in the
HIP resource record stored at that owner name. Such situations occur HIP resource record stored at that owner name. Such situations occur
skipping to change at page 8, line 49 skipping to change at page 9, line 8
4.2. Initiating Connections Based on DNS Names 4.2. Initiating Connections Based on DNS Names
On a HIP node, a Host Identity Protocol exchange SHOULD be initiated On a HIP node, a Host Identity Protocol exchange SHOULD be initiated
whenever a ULP attempts to communicate with an entity and the DNS whenever a ULP attempts to communicate with an entity and the DNS
lookup returns HIP resource records. lookup returns HIP resource records.
The HIP resource records have a Time To Live (TTL) associated with The HIP resource records have a Time To Live (TTL) associated with
them. When the number of seconds that passed since the record was them. When the number of seconds that passed since the record was
retrieved exceeds the record's TTL, the record MUST be considered to retrieved exceeds the record's TTL, the record MUST be considered to
be no longer valid and deleted by the entiry that retrieved it. If be no longer valid and deleted by the entity that retrieved it. If
access to the record is necessary to initiate communication with the access to the record is necessary to initiate communication with the
entity to which the record corresponds, a new query MUST be be made entity to which the record corresponds, a new query MUST be be made
to retrieve a fresh copy of the record. to retrieve a fresh copy of the record.
There may be multiple HIP RRs associated with a single name. It is There may be multiple HIP RRs associated with a single name. It is
outside the scope of this specification as to how a host chooses from outside the scope of this specification as to how a host chooses from
between multiple RRs when more than one is returned. The RVS between multiple RRs when more than one is returned. The RVS
information may be copied and aligned across multiple RRs, or may be information may be copied and aligned across multiple RRs, or may be
different for each one; a host MUST check that the RVS used is different for each one; a host MUST check that the RVS used is
associated with the HI being used, when multiple choices are associated with the HI being used, when multiple choices are present.
present."
5. HIP RR Storage Format 5. HIP RR Storage Format
The RDATA for a HIP RR consists of a public key algorithm type, the The RDATA for a HIP RR consists of a public key algorithm type, the
HIT length, a HIT, a public key, and optionally one or more HIT length, a HIT, a public key (i.e., a HI), and optionally one or
rendezvous server(s). more rendezvous server(s).
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| HIT length | PK algorithm | PK length | | HIT length | PK algorithm | PK length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | | |
~ HIT ~ ~ HIT ~
| | | |
+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 10, line 48 skipping to change at page 10, line 48
In addition, this document similarly defines the public key format of In addition, this document similarly defines the public key format of
type ECDSA as the algorithm-specific portion of the DNSKEY RR RDATA type ECDSA as the algorithm-specific portion of the DNSKEY RR RDATA
for ECDSA [RFC6605], i.e, all of the DNSKEY RR DATA after the first for ECDSA [RFC6605], i.e, all of the DNSKEY RR DATA after the first
four octets, corresponding to the same portion of the DNSKEY RR that four octets, corresponding to the same portion of the DNSKEY RR that
must be specified by documents that define a DNSSEC algorithm. must be specified by documents that define a DNSSEC algorithm.
5.6. Rendezvous Servers Format 5.6. Rendezvous Servers Format
The Rendezvous Servers field indicates one or more variable length The Rendezvous Servers field indicates one or more variable length
wire-encoded domain names of rendezvous server(s), as described in wire-encoded domain names of rendezvous server(s), concatenated, and
Section 3.3 of RFC 1035 [RFC1035]. The wire-encoded format is self- encoded as described in Section 3.3 of RFC 1035 [RFC1035]: "<domain-
describing, so the length is implicit. The domain names MUST NOT be name> is a domain name represented as a series of labels, and
compressed. The rendezvous server(s) are listed in order of terminated by a label with zero length". Since the wire-encoded
preference (i.e., first rendezvous server(s) are preferred), defining format is self-describing, the length of each domain-name is
an implicit order amongst rendezvous servers of a single RR. When implicit: The zero length label termination serves as a separator
multiple HIP RRs are present at the same owner name, this implicit between multiple rendezvous server domain names concatenated in the
order of rendezvous servers within an RR MUST NOT be used to infer a Rendezvous Servers field of a same HIP RR. Since the length of the
preference order between rendezvous servers stored in different RRs. other portion of the RR's RRDATA is known, and the overall length of
the RR's RDATA is also known (RDLENGTH), all the length information
necessary to parse the HIP RR is available.
The domain names MUST NOT be compressed. The rendezvous server(s)
are listed in order of preference (i.e., first rendezvous server(s)
are preferred), defining an implicit order amongst rendezvous servers
of a single RR. When multiple HIP RRs are present at the same owner
name, this implicit order of rendezvous servers within an RR MUST NOT
be used to infer a preference order between rendezvous servers stored
in different RRs.
6. HIP RR Presentation Format 6. HIP RR Presentation Format
This section specifies the representation of the HIP RR in a zone This section specifies the representation of the HIP RR in a zone
master file. master file.
The HIT length field is not represented, as it is implicitly known The HIT length field is not represented, as it is implicitly known
thanks to the HIT field representation. thanks to the HIT field representation.
The PK algorithm field is represented as unsigned integers. The PK algorithm field is represented as unsigned integers.
The HIT field is represented as the Base16 encoding [RFC4648] (a.k.a. The HIT field is represented as the Base16 encoding [RFC4648] (a.k.a.
hex or hexadecimal) of the HIT. The encoding MUST NOT contain hex or hexadecimal) of the HIT. The encoding MUST NOT contain
whitespaces to distinguish it from the public key field. whitespaces to distinguish it from the public key field.
The Public Key field is represented as the Base64 encoding [RFC4648] The Public Key field is represented as the Base64 encoding of the
of the public key. The encoding MUST NOT contain whitespace(s) to public key, as defined in Section 4 of [RFC4648]. The encoding MUST
distinguish it from the Rendezvous Servers field. NOT contain whitespace(s) to distinguish it from the Rendezvous
Servers field.
The PK length field is not represented, as it is implicitly known The PK length field is not represented, as it is implicitly known
thanks to the Public key field representation containing no thanks to the Public key field representation containing no
whitespaces. whitespaces.
The Rendezvous Servers field is represented by one or more domain The Rendezvous Servers field is represented by one or more domain
name(s) separated by whitespace(s). name(s) separated by whitespace(s). These whitespace(s) are only
used in the HIP RR representation format, and are not part of the HIP
RR wire format.
The complete representation of the HPIHI record is: The complete representation of the HIP record is:
IN HIP ( pk-algorithm IN HIP ( pk-algorithm
base16-encoded-hit base16-encoded-hit
base64-encoded-public-key base64-encoded-public-key
rendezvous-server[1] rendezvous-server[1]
... ...
rendezvous-server[n] ) rendezvous-server[n] )
When no RVSs are present, the representation of the HPIHI record is: When no RVSs are present, the representation of the HIP record is:
IN HIP ( pk-algorithm IN HIP ( pk-algorithm
base16-encoded-hit base16-encoded-hit
base64-encoded-public-key ) base64-encoded-public-key )
7. Examples 7. Examples
In the examples below, the public key field containing no whitespace In the examples below, the public key field containing no whitespace
is wrapped since it does not fit in a single line of this document. is wrapped since it does not fit in a single line of this document.
skipping to change at page 12, line 46 skipping to change at page 13, line 14
8. Security Considerations 8. Security Considerations
This section contains a description of the known threats involved This section contains a description of the known threats involved
with the usage of the HIP DNS Extension. with the usage of the HIP DNS Extension.
In a manner similar to the IPSECKEY RR [RFC4025], the HIP DNS In a manner similar to the IPSECKEY RR [RFC4025], the HIP DNS
Extension allows for the provision of two HIP nodes with the public Extension allows for the provision of two HIP nodes with the public
keying material (HI) of their peer. These HIs will be subsequently keying material (HI) of their peer. These HIs will be subsequently
used in a key exchange between the peers. Hence, the HIP DNS used in a key exchange between the peers. Hence, the HIP DNS
Extension introduces the same kind of threats that IPSECKEY does, Extension is subject, as the IPSECKEY RR, to threats stemming from
plus threats caused by the possibility given to a HIP node to attacks against unsecured HIP RRs, as described in the remainder of
initiate or accept a HIP exchange using "opportunistic" or this section.
"unpublished Initiator HI" modes.
A HIP node SHOULD obtain HIP RRs from a trusted party trough a secure A HIP node SHOULD obtain HIP RRs from a trusted party trough a secure
channel ensuring data integrity and authenticity of the RRs. DNSSEC channel ensuring data integrity and authenticity of the RRs. DNSSEC
[RFC4033] [RFC4034] [RFC4035] provides such a secure channel. [RFC4033] [RFC4034] [RFC4035] provides such a secure channel.
However, it should be emphasized that DNSSEC only offers data However, it should be emphasized that DNSSEC only offers data
integrity and authenticity guarantees to the channel between the DNS integrity and authenticity guarantees to the channel between the DNS
server publishing a zone and the HIP node. DNSSEC does not ensure server publishing a zone and the HIP node. DNSSEC does not ensure
that the entity publishing the zone is trusted. Therefore, the RRSIG that the entity publishing the zone is trusted. Therefore, the RRSIG
signature of the HIP RRSet MUST NOT be misinterpreted as a signature of the HIP RRSet MUST NOT be misinterpreted as a
certificate binding the HI and/or the HIT to the owner name. certificate binding the HI and/or the HIT to the owner name.
skipping to change at page 14, line 16 skipping to change at page 14, line 30
based solely on a HIT retrieved from the DNS, but SHOULD rather use based solely on a HIT retrieved from the DNS, but SHOULD rather use
HI-based authentication. HI-based authentication.
8.3. DNSSEC 8.3. DNSSEC
In the absence of DNSSEC, the HIP RR is subject to the threats In the absence of DNSSEC, the HIP RR is subject to the threats
described in RFC 3833 [RFC3833]. described in RFC 3833 [RFC3833].
9. IANA Considerations 9. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to replace references to [RFC5205] by references to [RFC5205], obsoleted by this document, made the following definition
this document in the the DNS RR type code registry. and reservation in the IANA Registry for DNS RR Types:
IANA is requested to allocate the following algorithm type in the Value Type
IPSECKEY RR [RFC4025] registry: ----- ----
55 HIP
[IANA-TBD] is ECDSA This document updates the IANA Registry for DNS RR Types by replacing
references to [RFC5205] by references to this document.
As [RFC5205], this document reuses the Algorithm Types defined by
[RFC4025] for the IPSEC KEY RR. Presently defined values are shown
here for reference only:
Value Description
----- --------------------------------------------------------
1 A DSA key is present, in the format defined in [RFC2536]
2 A RSA key is present, in the format defined in [RFC3110]
IANA is requested to make the following Algorithm Type reservation
and definition in the IANA Registry for the IPSECKEY RR [RFC4025]
Algorithm Types:
Value Description
-------- -----------
TBD-IANA An ECDSA key is present, in the format defined in [RFC6605]
10. Contributors 10. Contributors
Pekka Nikander (pekka.nikander@nomadiclab.com) co-authored an Pekka Nikander co-authored an earlier, experimental version of this
earlier, experimental version of this specification [RFC5205]. specification [RFC5205].
11. Acknowledgments 11. Acknowledgments
As usual in the IETF, this document is the result of a collaboration As usual in the IETF, this document is the result of a collaboration
between many people. The authors would like to thank the author between many people. The authors would like to thank the author
(Michael Richardson), contributors, and reviewers of the IPSECKEY RR (Michael Richardson), contributors, and reviewers of the IPSECKEY RR
[RFC4025] specification, after which this document was framed. The [RFC4025] specification, after which this document was framed. The
authors would also like to thank the following people, who have authors would also like to thank the following people, who have
provided thoughtful and helpful discussions and/or suggestions, that provided thoughtful and helpful discussions and/or suggestions, that
have helped improve this document: Jeff Ahrenholz, Rob Austein, Hannu have helped improve this document: Jeff Ahrenholz, Rob Austein, Hannu
Flinck, Olafur Gudmundsson, Tom Henderson, Peter Koch, Olaf Kolkman, Flinck, Olafur Gudmundsson, Tom Henderson, Peter Koch, Olaf Kolkman,
Miika Komu, Andrew McGregor, Erik Nordmark, and Gabriel Montenegro. Miika Komu, Andrew McGregor, Erik Nordmark, and Gabriel Montenegro.
Some parts of this document stem from the HIP specification Some parts of this document stem from the HIP specification
[I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis]. [RFC7401]. Finally, thanks Sheng Jiang for performing the Internet
Area Directorate review of this document in the course of the
publication process.
12. References 12. References
12.1. Normative references 12.1. Normative references
[I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis]
Moskowitz, R., Heer, T., Jokela, P., and T. Henderson,
"Host Identity Protocol Version 2 (HIPv2)", draft-ietf-
hip-rfc5201-bis-20 (work in progress), October 2014.
[I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis] [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis]
Laganier, J. and L. Eggert, "Host Identity Protocol (HIP) Laganier, J. and L. Eggert, "Host Identity Protocol (HIP)
Rendezvous Extension", draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis-05 (work Rendezvous Extension", draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis-07 (work
in progress), December 2014. in progress), December 2015.
[RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", [RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities",
STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987. STD 13, RFC 1034, DOI 10.17487/RFC1034, November 1987,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1034>.
[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and [RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, DOI 10.17487/RFC1035,
November 1987, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1035>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC2181] Elz, R. and R. Bush, "Clarifications to the DNS [RFC2181] Elz, R. and R. Bush, "Clarifications to the DNS
Specification", RFC 2181, July 1997. Specification", RFC 2181, DOI 10.17487/RFC2181, July 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2181>.
[RFC3596] Thomson, S., Huitema, C., Ksinant, V., and M. Souissi, [RFC3596] Thomson, S., Huitema, C., Ksinant, V., and M. Souissi,
"DNS Extensions to Support IP Version 6", RFC 3596, "DNS Extensions to Support IP Version 6", RFC 3596,
October 2003. DOI 10.17487/RFC3596, October 2003,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3596>.
[RFC4025] Richardson, M., "A Method for Storing IPsec Keying [RFC4025] Richardson, M., "A Method for Storing IPsec Keying
Material in DNS", RFC 4025, March 2005. Material in DNS", RFC 4025, DOI 10.17487/RFC4025, March
2005, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4025>.
[RFC4033] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. [RFC4033] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements", RFC Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements",
4033, March 2005. RFC 4033, DOI 10.17487/RFC4033, March 2005,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4033>.
[RFC4034] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. [RFC4034] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
Rose, "Resource Records for the DNS Security Extensions", Rose, "Resource Records for the DNS Security Extensions",
RFC 4034, March 2005. RFC 4034, DOI 10.17487/RFC4034, March 2005,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4034>.
[RFC4035] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. [RFC4035] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
Rose, "Protocol Modifications for the DNS Security Rose, "Protocol Modifications for the DNS Security
Extensions", RFC 4035, March 2005. Extensions", RFC 4035, DOI 10.17487/RFC4035, March 2005,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4035>.
[RFC4648] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data [RFC4648] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data
Encodings", RFC 4648, October 2006. Encodings", RFC 4648, DOI 10.17487/RFC4648, October 2006,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4648>.
[RFC6605] Hoffman, P. and W. Wijngaards, "Elliptic Curve Digital [RFC6605] Hoffman, P. and W. Wijngaards, "Elliptic Curve Digital
Signature Algorithm (DSA) for DNSSEC", RFC 6605, April Signature Algorithm (DSA) for DNSSEC", RFC 6605,
2012. DOI 10.17487/RFC6605, April 2012,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6605>.
[RFC7401] Moskowitz, R., Ed., Heer, T., Jokela, P., and T.
Henderson, "Host Identity Protocol Version 2 (HIPv2)",
RFC 7401, DOI 10.17487/RFC7401, April 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7401>.
12.2. Informative references 12.2. Informative references
[RFC2536] Eastlake, D., "DSA KEYs and SIGs in the Domain Name System [RFC2536] Eastlake 3rd, D., "DSA KEYs and SIGs in the Domain Name
(DNS)", RFC 2536, March 1999. System (DNS)", RFC 2536, DOI 10.17487/RFC2536, March 1999,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2536>.
[RFC3110] Eastlake, D., "RSA/SHA-1 SIGs and RSA KEYs in the Domain [RFC3110] Eastlake 3rd, D., "RSA/SHA-1 SIGs and RSA KEYs in the
Name System (DNS)", RFC 3110, May 2001. Domain Name System (DNS)", RFC 3110, DOI 10.17487/RFC3110,
May 2001, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3110>.
[RFC3833] Atkins, D. and R. Austein, "Threat Analysis of the Domain [RFC3833] Atkins, D. and R. Austein, "Threat Analysis of the Domain
Name System (DNS)", RFC 3833, August 2004. Name System (DNS)", RFC 3833, DOI 10.17487/RFC3833, August
2004, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3833>.
[RFC4423] Moskowitz, R. and P. Nikander, "Host Identity Protocol [RFC4423] Moskowitz, R. and P. Nikander, "Host Identity Protocol
(HIP) Architecture", RFC 4423, May 2006. (HIP) Architecture", RFC 4423, DOI 10.17487/RFC4423, May
2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4423>.
[RFC5205] Nikander, P. and J. Laganier, "Host Identity Protocol [RFC5205] Nikander, P. and J. Laganier, "Host Identity Protocol
(HIP) Domain Name System (DNS) Extensions", RFC 5205, (HIP) Domain Name System (DNS) Extensions", RFC 5205,
April 2008. DOI 10.17487/RFC5205, April 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5205>.
[RFC5206] Henderson, T., Ed., "End-Host Mobility and Multihoming [RFC5206] Henderson, T., Ed., "End-Host Mobility and Multihoming
with the Host Identity Protocol", RFC 5206, April 2008. with the Host Identity Protocol", RFC 5206, April 2008.
Appendix A. Changes from RFC 5205 Appendix A. Changes from RFC 5205
o Updated HIP references to revised HIP specifications. o Updated HIP references to revised HIP specifications.
o Extended DNS HIP RR to support for Host Identities based on o Extended DNS HIP RR to support for Host Identities based on
Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA). Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA).
o Clarified that new query must be made when the time that passed o Clarified that new query must be made when the time that passed
since a RR was retrieved exceeds the TTL of the RR. since a RR was retrieved exceeds the TTL of the RR.
o Added considerations related to multiple HIP RRs being associated o Added considerations related to multiple HIP RRs being associated
with a single name. with a single name.
o Clarified that the Base64 encoding in use is as per Section 4 of
[RFC4648].
o Clarified the wire format when more than one rendezvous servers
are defined in one RR.
o Clarified that "whitespace" is used as the delimiter in the human-
readable representation of the RR but is not part of the wire
format.
Author's Address Author's Address
Julien Laganier Julien Laganier
Luminate Wireless, Inc. Luminate Wireless, Inc.
Cupertino, CA Cupertino, CA
USA USA
EMail: julien.ietf@gmail.com EMail: julien.ietf@gmail.com
 End of changes. 61 change blocks. 
120 lines changed or deleted 191 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/