idnits 2.17.1 draft-calhoun-diameter-accounting-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Looks like you're using RFC 2026 boilerplate. This must be updated to follow RFC 3978/3979, as updated by RFC 4748. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about Internet-Drafts being working documents. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of current Internet-Drafts -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of Shadow Directories -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? == The page length should not exceed 58 lines per page, but there was 21 longer pages, the longest (page 2) being 60 lines == It seems as if not all pages are separated by form feeds - found 0 form feeds but 22 pages Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a Security Considerations section. ** The document seems to lack separate sections for Informative/Normative References. All references will be assumed normative when checking for downward references. ** There is 1 instance of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 1 character in excess of 72. ** The abstract seems to contain references ([2], [3], [10]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year == Line 963 has weird spacing: '... copied and ...' == Line 964 has weird spacing: '...s, and deriv...' == Line 966 has weird spacing: '...blished and d...' == Line 967 has weird spacing: '...hat the above...' == Line 968 has weird spacing: '... and this ...' == (5 more instances...) == The document seems to lack the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119 keywords. (The document does seem to have the reference to RFC 2119 which the ID-Checklist requires). -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- Couldn't find a document date in the document -- date freshness check skipped. Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Unused Reference: '4' is defined on line 899, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: '5' is defined on line 902, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Outdated reference: A later version (-18) exists of draft-calhoun-diameter-08 -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. '1' -- No information found for draft-calhoun-diameter-auth - is the name correct? -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. '2' == Outdated reference: A later version (-12) exists of draft-calhoun-diameter-mobileip-02 -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. '3' ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2138 (ref. '4') (Obsoleted by RFC 2865) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2139 (ref. '5') (Obsoleted by RFC 2866) -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. '7' ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2434 (ref. '8') (Obsoleted by RFC 5226) == Outdated reference: A later version (-04) exists of draft-calhoun-diameter-proxy-02 -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. '9' == Outdated reference: A later version (-08) exists of draft-ietf-roamops-actng-05 -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. '10' == Outdated reference: A later version (-02) exists of draft-aboba-acct-01 -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. '11' Summary: 11 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 17 warnings (==), 10 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 INTERNET DRAFT Jari Arkko 2 Category: Standards Track Oy LM Ericsson Ab 3 Title: draft-calhoun-diameter-accounting-00.txt Pat R. Calhoun 4 Date: September 1999 Sun Microsystems, Inc. 5 Pankaj Patel 6 Convergys Corporation 7 Glen Zorn 8 Microsoft Corporation 10 DIAMETER Accounting Extension 12 Status of this Memo 14 This document is an individual contribution for consideration by the 15 AAA Working Group of the Internet Engineering Task Force. Comments 16 should be submitted to the diameter@ipass.com mailing list. 18 Distribution of this memo is unlimited. 20 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 21 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are working 22 documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, 23 and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute 24 working documents as Internet-Drafts. 26 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 27 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at 28 any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 29 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 31 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at: 33 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt 35 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at: 37 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 39 Abstract 41 The DIAMETER protocol provides Authentication and Authorization for 42 dial-up PPP clients [2] and for Mobile-IP [3]. The ROAMOPS WG has 43 been working on an accounting data format, called Accounting Data 44 Interchange Format (ADIF) [10], as a method to transfer accounting 45 information over a wide variety of transports. This document describes 46 how ADIF can be securely transmitted over the DIAMETER protocol. 48 Table of Contents 50 1.0 Introduction 51 1.1 Copyright Statement 52 1.2 Requirements language 53 2.0 Command Codes 54 2.1 Accounting-Request 55 2.2 Accounting-Answer 56 3.0 DIAMETER AVPs 57 3.1 Accounting-Session-Id 58 3.2 Accounting-Record-Type 59 3.3 ADIF-Record 60 3.4 Accounting-Confirmation 61 3.5 Accounting-Digital-Signature 62 3.6 Accounting-Certificate 63 4.0 Protocol overview 64 4.1 Use of Accounting Certificate 65 5.0 IANA Considerations 66 6.0 Acknowledgments 67 7.0 References 68 8.0 Authors' Addresses 69 9.0 Full Copyright Statement 71 1.0 Introduction 73 The DIAMETER protocol provides Authentication and Authorization for 74 dial-up PPP clients [2] and for Mobile-IP [3]. The ROAMOPS WG has 75 been working on an accounting data format, called Accounting Data 76 Interchange Format (ADIF) [10], as a method to transfer accounting 77 information over a wide variety of transports. This document 78 describes how ADIF can be securely transmitted over the DIAMETER 79 protocol. 81 This document describes how Accounting Records can be transmitted 82 within the DIAMETER protocol in a secure fashion, even when the 83 messages must traverse DIAMETER proxies [1, 9]. This extension allows 84 for both real-time and batched accounting transfers. 86 This document introduces AVPs that are very similar to some found in 87 the base [1] and the end-to-end security extension [9]. However, 88 since this extension requires that the AVPs in question must have 89 bits set which are not currently permitted in both the stated drafts, 90 a new version of the AVP has been defined here. However, a future 91 version of this document may make use of the original AVPs once the 92 [1] and [9] have been corrected. If there is interest in this 93 extension, the impact of changing [1] and [9] must be carefully 94 evaluated. 96 The Extension number for this draft is five (5). This value is used 97 in the Extension-Id Attribute value Pair (AVP) as defined in [7]. 99 1.1 Copyright Statement 101 Copyright (C) The Internet Society 1999. All Rights Reserved. 103 1.2 Requirements language 105 In this document, the key words "MAY", "MUST, "MUST NOT", "optional", 106 "recommended", "SHOULD", and "SHOULD NOT", are to be interpreted as 107 described in [6]. 109 2.0 Command Codes 111 This section will define the Commands [1] for DIAMETER 112 implementations supporting the Mobile IP extension. 114 Command Name Command Code 115 ----------------------------------- 116 Accounting-Request ??? 117 Accounting-Answer ??? 119 2.1 Accounting-Request 121 Description 123 The Accounting-Request command is sent by a DIAMETER node in order 124 to exchange accounting information with a peer. The Accounting 125 information is contained within an ADIF record, as described in 126 [10]. 128 The Accounting-request command MAY contain accounting information 129 for more than a single session, which allows it to send batched 130 accounting information. When the batch mode is used, the session- 131 Id AVP [1] and the Digital-Signature AVP [6] MUST be present, and 132 MUST have a tag of the same value as the ADIF-Record AVP. 134 Message Format 136 ::= 137 138 139 [] 140 ( && 141 && 142 && 143 && 144 146 147 { || 148 ::= 213 214 215 216 [] 217 ( && 218 219 && 220 222 223 { || 224