idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-hokey-ldn-discovery-07.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (April 12, 2011) is 4763 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Outdated reference: A later version (-09) exists of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-relay-supplied-options-02 ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3315 (Obsoleted by RFC 8415) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 5296 (Obsoleted by RFC 6696) Summary: 2 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group G. Zorn 3 Internet-Draft Network Zen 4 Intended status: Standards Track Q. Wu 5 Expires: October 14, 2011 Y. Wang 6 Huawei 7 April 12, 2011 9 The ERP Local Domain Name DHCPv6 Option 10 draft-ietf-hokey-ldn-discovery-07 12 Abstract 14 In order to derive a Domain-Specific Root Key (DSRK) from the 15 Extended Master Session Key (EMSK) generated as a side-effect of an 16 Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) method, the EAP peer must 17 discover the name of the domain to which it is attached. 19 This document specifies a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Version 20 6 (DHCPv6) option designed to allow a DHCPv6 server to inform clients 21 using EAP of the name of the local domain. 23 Status of This Memo 25 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 26 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 28 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 29 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 30 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 31 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 33 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 34 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 35 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 36 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 38 This Internet-Draft will expire on October 14, 2011. 40 Copyright Notice 42 Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 43 document authors. All rights reserved. 45 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 46 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 47 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 48 publication of this document. Please review these documents 49 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 50 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 51 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 52 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 53 described in the Simplified BSD License. 55 Table of Contents 57 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 58 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 59 3. Option Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 60 3.1. DHCPv6 Local Domain Name Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 61 4. Client Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 62 5. Relay Agent Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 63 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 64 7. IANA considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 65 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 66 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 67 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 69 1. Introduction 71 The EAP Re-authentication Protocol (ERP) [RFC5296] is designed to 72 allow faster re-authentication of a mobile device which was 73 previously authenticated by means of the Extensible Authentication 74 Protocol [RFC3748]. Given that the local root key (e.g., DSRK RFC 75 5295 [RFC5295]) is generated using the local domain name (LDN), LDN 76 discovery is an important part of re-authentication. As described in 77 RFC 5296 [RFC5296], the local domain name can be learned by the 78 mobile device through the ERP exchange or via a lower-layer 79 mechanism. However, no lower-layer mechanisms for LDN discovery have 80 yet been defined. 82 This document specifies an extension to DHCPv6 for local domain name 83 discovery by ERP peers. 85 2. Terminology 87 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 88 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 89 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 91 3. Option Format 93 In DHCPv6-based local domain name discovery, the LDN option is used 94 by the DHCPv6 client to obtain the local domain name from the DHCPv6 95 Server after full EAP authentication has taken place. 97 3.1. DHCPv6 Local Domain Name Option 99 The format of this option is: 101 0 1 2 3 102 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 1 103 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 104 | OPTION_LOCAL_DOMAIN_NAME | option-length | 105 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 106 | local-domain-name... 107 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 109 option code 110 OPTION_LOCAL_DOMAIN_NAME (TBD) 112 option-length 113 Length of the local-domain-name field, in octets 115 local-domain-name 116 This field contains the name of the local domain and MUST be 117 encoded as specified in Section 8 of RFC 3315 [RFC3315] note that 118 this encoding does enable the use of internationalized domain 119 names, but only as a set of A-labels [RFC5890]. 121 4. Client Behavior 123 If a DHCPv6 client doesn't know the local domain name and requires 124 the DHCPv6 Server to provide the DHCPv6 LDN option, it MUST include 125 an Option Request option requesting the DHCPv6 LDN option, as 126 described in Section 22.7 of RFC 3315 [RFC3315]. 128 When the DHCPv6 client recieves a LDN option with the local domain 129 name present in it, it MUST verify that the option length is no more 130 than 256 octets (the maximum length of a single FQDN allowed by DNS), 131 and that the local domain name is a properly encoded single FQDN, as 132 specified in Section 8, "Representation and Use of Domain Names" of 133 RFC3315 [RFC3315]. 135 5. Relay Agent Behavior 137 If a DHCPv6 relay agent has pre-existing knowledge of the local 138 domain name (for example, from a previous AAA exchange), it SHOULD 139 include it in an instance of the DHCPv6 LDN option and forward to the 140 DHPv6 server as a suboption of the Relay-Supplied Options option 141 [I-D.ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-relay-supplied-options]. 143 6. Security Considerations 145 The communication between the DHCPv6 client and the DHCPv6 server for 146 the exchange of local domain name information is security sensitive 147 and requires authentication, integrity and replay protection. DHCPv6 148 security [RFC3315] can be used for this purpose. 150 7. IANA considerations 152 IANA is requested to assign one new option code from the registry of 153 DHCP Option Codes maintained at 154 http://www.iana.org/assignments/dhcpv6-parameters, referencing this 155 document. 157 8. References 159 8.1. Normative References 161 [I-D.ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-relay-supplied-options] Lemon, T. and W. Wu, 162 "Relay-Supplied DHCP 163 Options", draft-ietf- 164 dhc-dhcpv6-relay- 165 supplied-options-02 166 (work in progress), 167 September 2010. 169 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words 170 for use in RFCs to 171 Indicate Requirement 172 Levels", BCP 14, 173 RFC 2119, March 1997. 175 [RFC3315] Droms, R., Bound, J., 176 Volz, B., Lemon, T., 177 Perkins, C., and M. 178 Carney, "Dynamic Host 179 Configuration Protocol 180 for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", 181 RFC 3315, July 2003. 183 [RFC5295] Salowey, J., Dondeti, 184 L., Narayanan, V., and 185 M. Nakhjiri, 186 "Specification for the 187 Derivation of Root Keys 188 from an Extended Master 189 Session Key (EMSK)", 190 RFC 5295, August 2008. 192 [RFC5296] Narayanan, V. and L. 193 Dondeti, "EAP 194 Extensions for EAP Re- 195 authentication Protocol 196 (ERP)", RFC 5296, 197 August 2008. 199 8.2. Informative References 201 [RFC3748] Aboba, B., Blunk, L., 202 Vollbrecht, J., 203 Carlson, J., and H. 204 Levkowetz, "Extensible 205 Authentication Protocol 206 (EAP)", RFC 3748, 207 June 2004. 209 [RFC5890] Klensin, J., 210 "Internationalized 211 Domain Names for 212 Applications (IDNA): 213 Definitions and 214 Document Framework", 215 RFC 5890, August 2010. 217 Authors' Addresses 219 Glen Zorn 220 Network Zen 221 227/358 Thanon Sanphawut 222 Bang Na, Bangkok 10260 223 Thailand 225 Phone: +66 (0) 87-040-4617 226 EMail: gwz@net-zen.net 228 Qin Wu 229 Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. 230 101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District 231 Nanjing, Jiangsu 21001 232 China 234 Phone: +86-25-84565892 235 EMail: sunseawq@huawei.com 237 Yungui Wang 238 Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. 239 Site B, Floor 10, HuiHong Mansion, No.91 BaiXia Rd. 240 Nanjing, Jiangsu 210001 241 P.R. China 243 Phone: +86 25 84565893 244 EMail: w52006@huawei.com