Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Compression Using Lempel-Ziv-Stac (LZS)
draft-friend-tls-lzs-compression-04

Network Working Group                                         R. Friend
Internet-Draft                                                     Hifn
                                                           June 4, 2004
Expires: December 4, 2004

         Transport Layer Security Protocol Compression Using LZS
                   draft-friend-tls-lzs-compression-04.txt

Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
   not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this
   memo is unlimited.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that 
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html

   This Internet-Draft will expire on December 4, 2004.

   It is intended that a future version of this draft be submitted to
   the IESG for publication as an Informational RFC. Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

   The Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol (RFC 2246) includes
   features to negotiate selection of a lossless data compression method
   as part of the TLS Handshake Protocol and to then apply the algorithm
   associated with the selected method as part of the TLS Record
   Protocol.  TLS defines one standard compression method which
   specifies that data exchanged via the record protocol will not be
   compressed.  This document describes an additional compression method
   associated with the Lempel-Ziv-Stac (LZS) lossless data compression 
   algorithm for use with TLS.  This document also defines the 
   application of the LZS algorithm to the TLS Record Protocol.

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004                [Page 1]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

Conventions Used In This Document

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [1].

Table of Contents

   1.   Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   1.1      General. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   1.2      Licensing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   1.3      Specification of Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   2.   Compression Methods  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   2.1      LZS CompresionMethod . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   2.2      Security Issues with Single History Compression. . . . .  5
   3.   LZS Compression  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.1      Background of LZS Compression  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.2      LZS Compression History and Record Processing  . . . . .  6
   3.3      LZS Compressed Record Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   3.4      TLSComp Header Format  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   3.4.1       Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   3.5      LZS Compression Encoding Format  . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   3.6      Padding  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   4.   Sending Compressed Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   4.1      Transmitter Process  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   4.2      Receiver Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   4.3      Anti-Expansion Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   5.   Internationalization Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   6.   IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   7.   Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   8.   Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
        References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
        Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
        Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . 17

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004                [Page 2]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

1. Introduction

1.1 General

   The Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol (RFC 2246, [2]) includes
   features to negotiate selection of a lossless data compression method
   as part of the TLS Handshake Protocol and to then apply the algorithm
   associated with the selected method as part of the TLS Record
   Protocol.  TLS defines one standard compression method,
   CompressionMethod.null, which specifies that data exchanged via the
   record protocol will not be compressed.  While this single
   compression method helps ensure that TLS implementations are
   interoperable, the lack of additional standard compression methods
   has limited the ability of implementers to develop interoperable
   implementations that include data compression.

   TLS is used extensively to secure client-server connections on the
   World Wide Web.  While these connections can often be characterized
   as short-lived and exchanging relatively small amounts of data, TLS
   is also being used in environments where connections can be
   long-lived and the amount of data exchanged can extend into thousands
   or millions of octets.  For example, TLS is now increasingly being
   used as an alternative VPN connection.  Compression services have 
   long been associated with IPSec and PPTP VPN connections, so 
   extending compression services to TLS VPN connections preserves the 
   user experience for any VPN connection.  Compression within TLS is 
   one way to help reduce the bandwidth and latency requirements 
   associated with exchanging large amounts of data while preserving the
   security services provided by TLS.

   This document describes an additional compression method associated
   with a lossless data compression algorithm for use with TLS.  This 
   document specifies the application of Lempel-Ziv-Stac (LZS) 
   compression, a lossless compression algorithm, to TLS record 
   payloads.  This specification also assumes a thorough understanding 
   of the TLS protocol [2].

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004                [Page 3]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

1.2 Specification of Requirements

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [1].

2. Compression Methods

   As described in section 6 of RFC 2246 [2], TLS is a stateful
   protocol.  Compression methods used with TLS can be either stateful
   (the compressor maintains its state through all compressed records)
   or stateless (the compressor compresses each record independently),
   but there seems to be little known benefit in using a stateless
   compression method within TLS.  The LZS compression method described
   in this document is stateful.

   Compression algorithms can occasionally expand, rather than compress,
   input data.  The worst case expansion factor of the LZS compression 
   method is only 12.5%.  Thus, TLS records of 15K bytes can never 
   exceed the expansion limits described in section 6.2.2 of RFC 2246 
   [2].  If TLS records of 16K bytes expand to greater than 17K bytes, 
   then the uncompressed version of the TLS record must be transmitted,
   as described below.

2.1   LZS CompressionMethod

   The LZS CompressionMethod is a 16-bit index, and is negotiated as
   described in RFC2246 [2] and RFC3749 [3].  The LZS CompressionMethod
   is stored in the TLS Record Layer connection state as described in 
   RFC2246 [2].

   IANA has assigned <TBD> as compression method identifier for applying
   LZS compression to TLS record payloads.

2.2 Security Issues with Compression Histories

   Sharing compression histories between more than one TLS session may
   potentially cause information leakage between the TLS sessions, as 
   pathological compressed data can potentially reference data prior to
   the beginning of the current record.  LZS implementations guard 
   against this situation.  However, to avoid this potential threat 
   from occurring, implementations that support TLS compression MUST use
   separate compression histories for each TLS session.  This is not a 
   limitation of LZS compression, but is an artifact for any 
   compression algorithm.

   Furthermore, the LZS compression history (as well as any compression
   history) contains plaintext.  Specifically, the LZS history contains
   the last 2K bytes of plaintext of the TLS session.  Thus, when the 

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004                [Page 4]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

   TLS session terminates, the implementation SHOULD treat the history 
  as it does any plaintext (e.g. free memory, overwrite contents, etc.).

3. LZS Compression

3.1 Background of LZS Compression

   Starting with a sliding window compression history, similar to LZ1 
   [8], a new, enhanced compression algorithm identified as LZS was 
   developed.  The LZS algorithm is a general-purpose lossless 
   compression algorithm for use with a wide variety of data types.  
   It's encoding method is very efficient, providing compression for 
   strings as short as two octets in length.

   The LZS algorithm uses a sliding window of 2,048 bytes.  During
   compression, redundant sequences of data are replaced with tokens
   that represent those sequences. During decompression, the original
   sequences are substituted for the tokens in such a way that the
   original data is exactly recovered. LZS differs from lossy
   compression algorithms, such as those often used for video
   compression, that do not exactly reproduce the original data.
   The details of LZS compression can be found in section 3.5 below.

3.2 LZS Compression History and Record Processing

   This standard specifies "stateful" compression, that is, maintaining
   the compression history between records within a particular TLS 
   compression session.  Within each separate compression history, the
   LZS CompressionMethod has the ability to maintain compression 
   history information when compressing and decompressing record 
   payloads.  Stateful compression provides a higher compression ratio 
   to be achieved on the data stream as compared to stateless
   compression (resetting the compression history between every record),
   particularly for small records.

   Stateful compression requires both a reliable link and sequenced
   record delivery, to ensure all records can be decompressed in the 
   same order they were compressed.  Since TLS and lower-layer 
   protocols provide reliable, sequenced record delivery, compression 
   history information MAY be maintained and exploited when using the 
   LZS CompressionMethod.

   Furthermore, there MUST be a separate LZS compression history 
   associated with each open TLS session.  This not only provides 
   enhanced security (no potential information leakage between sessions
   via a shared compression history), but also enables superior 
   compression ratio (bit bandwidth on the connection) across all open 
   TLS sessions with compression.  A shared history would require 
   resetting the compression (and decompression) history when switching
   between TLS sessions, and a single history implementation would 
   require resetting the compression (and decompression) history 

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004                [Page 5]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

   between each record.

   The sender MUST reset the compression history prior to compressing
   the first TLS record of a TLS session after TLS handshake completes.
   It is advantageous for the sender to maintain the compression history 
   for all subsequent records processed during the TLS session.  This 
   results in the greatest compression ratio for a given data set.  In 
   either case, this compression history MUST NOT be used for any other 
   open TLS session, in order to ensure privacy between TLS sessions.

   The sender MUST "flush" the compressor each time it transmits a
   compressed record.  Flushing means that all data going into the
   compressor is included in the output, i.e., no data is retained in
   the hope of achieving better compression.  Flushing ensures that 
   each compressed record payload can be decompressed completely.  
   Flushing is necessary to prevent a record's data from spilling over
   into a later record.  This is important to synchronize compressed 
   data with the authenticated and encrypted data in a TLS record.
   Flushing is handled automatically in most LZS implementations.

   When the TLS session terminates, the implementation SHOULD dispose of
   the memory resources associated with the related TLS compression 
   history.  That is, the compression history SHOULD be handled as the 
   TLS key material is handled.

   The LZS CompressionMethod also features "decompressing" uncompressed
   data in order to maintain the history in the case that the 
   "compressed" data actually expanded.  The LZS CompressionMethod record 
   format facilitates identifying whether records contain compressed or 
   uncompressed data.  The LZS decoding process accommodates decompressing 
   either compressed or uncompressed data.

3.3 LZS Compressed Record Format

   Prior to compression, the uncompressed data (TLSPlaintext.fragment) 
   comprises a plaintext TLS record.  After compression, the compressed 
   data (TLSCompressed.fragment) comprises a 8-bit TLSComp header 
   followed by the compressed (or uncompressed) data.

3.4.  TLSComp Header Format

   The one-octet header has the following structure:

   0                
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |     Flags     |
   |               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004                [Page 6]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

3.4.1   Flags

      The format of the 8-bit Flags TLSComp field is as follows:

         0     1     2     3     4     5     6     7
      +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
      | Res | Res | Res | Res | Res | Res | RST | C/U |
      +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+

   Res - Reserved

      Reserved for future use.  MUST be set to zero.  MUST be ignored 
      by the receiving node.

      RST - Reset Compression History

      The RST bit is used to inform the decompressing peer that
      the compression history in this TLS session was reset prior 
      to the data contained in this TLS record being compressed.  When 
      the RST bit is set to "1" a compression history reset is 
      performed, when RST is set to "0", a compression history reset is
      not performed.

      This bit MUST be set to a value of "1" for the first 
      compressed TLS transmitted record of a TLS session.  This bit 
      may also be used by the transmitter for other exception cases 
      when the compression history must be reset.

      C/U - Compressed/Uncompressed Bit

      The C/U indicates whether the data field contains compressed or
      uncompressed data.  A value of 1 indicates compressed data
      (often referred to as a compressed record), and a value of 0
      indicates uncompressed data (or an uncompressed record).

3.5 LZS Compression Encoding Format

   The LZS compression method, encoding format, and application examples
   are described in RFC 1967 [6], RFC 1974 [5], and RFC 2395[4].

   Some implementations of LZS allow the sending compressor to select 
   from among several options to provide varying compression ratios, 
   processing speeds, and memory requirements.  Other implementations of LZS
   provide optimal compression ratio at byte per clock speeds.  

   The receiving LZS decompressor automatically adjusts to the settings
   selected by the sender.  Also, receiving LZS decompressors will update
   the decompression history with uncompressed data.  This facilitates 
   never obtaining less than 1:1 compression ratio (never transmit with

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004                [Page 7]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

   expanded data) in the session.

   The input to the payload compression algorithm is TLSPlaintext data 
   destined to an active TLS session with compression negotiated.  The 
   output of the algorithm is a new (and hopefully smaller) TLSCompressed 
   record. The output payload contains the input payload's data in 
   either compressed or uncompressed format. The input and output 
   payloads are each an integral number of bytes in length.

   The output payload is always prepended with the TLSComp header.  If
   the uncompressed form is used, the output payload is identical to
   the input payload, and the TLSComp header reflects uncompressed data.

   If the compressed form is used, encoded as defined in ANSI X3.241 
   [7], and the TLSComp header reflects compressed data.  The LZS 
   encoded format is repeated here for informational purposes ONLY.

   <Compressed Stream> := [<Compressed String>*] <End Marker>
   <Compressed String> := 0 <Raw Byte> | 1 <Compressed Bytes>

   <Raw Byte> := <b><b><b><b><b><b><b><b>          (8-bit byte)
   <Compressed Bytes> := <Offset> <Length>

   <Offset> := 1 <b><b><b><b><b><b><b> |           (7-bit offset)
               0 <b><b><b><b><b><b><b><b><b><b><b> (11-bit offset)
   <End Marker> := 110000000
   <b> := 1 | 0

   <Length> :=
   00        = 2     1111 0110      = 14
   01        = 3     1111 0111      = 15
   10        = 4     1111 1000      = 16
   1100      = 5     1111 1001      = 17
   1101      = 6     1111 1010      = 18
   1110      = 7     1111 1011      = 19
   1111 0000 = 8     1111 1100      = 20
   1111 0001 = 9     1111 1101      = 21
   1111 0010 = 10    1111 1110      = 22
   1111 0011 = 11    1111 1111 0000 = 23
   1111 0100 = 12    1111 1111 0001 = 24
   1111 0101 = 13     ...

3.6 Padding

   A datagram payload compressed using LZS always ends with the last
   compressed data byte (also known as the <end marker>), which is used
   to disambiguate padding.  This allows trailing bits as well as bytes
   to be considered padding.

   The size of a compressed payload MUST be in whole octet units.

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004                [Page 8]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

4.  Sending Compressed Datagrams

   All TLS records processed with a TLS session state that includes LZS
   compression are processed as follows.  The reliable and efficient 
   transport of LZS compressed records in the TLS session depends on
   the following processes.

4.1.  Transmitter Process

   The compression operation results in either compressed or
   uncompressed data.  When a TLS record is received, it is
   assigned to a particular TLS context that includes the LZS 
   compression history buffer.  It is processed according to
   ANSI X3.241-1994 to form compressed data or used as is to form
   uncompressed data.  For the first record of the session, or for 
   exception conditions, the compression history MUST be cleared.  In
   performing the compression operation the compression history MUST
   be updated when either a compressed record or uncompressed record
   is produced.  Uncompressed TLS records MAY be sent at any time. 
   Uncompressed TLS records MUST be sent if compression causes 
   enough expansion to cause the data compression TLS record size to
   exceed the MTU defined in section 6.2.2 in RFC 2246.
   The output of the compression operation is placed in the fragment
   field of the TLSCompressed structure (TLSCompressed.fragment).

   The TLSComp header byte is located just prior to the first byte 
   of the compressed TLS record in TLSCompressed.fragment.  The C/U 
   bit in the TLSComp header is set according to whether the data 
   field contains compressed or uncompressed data.  The RST bit in 
   the TLSComp header is set to "1" if the compression history was 
   reset prior to compressing the TLSplaintext.fragment that 
   comprises TLSCompressed.fragment.  Uncompressed data MUST be 
   transmitted (and the C/U bit set to 0) if the "compressed" 
   (expanded) data exceeded 17K bytes.

4.2.  Receiver Process

   Prior to decompressing the first compressed TLS record in the TLS 
   session, the receiver MUST reset the decompression history.  
   Subsequent records are decompressed in the order received.  The 
   receiver decompresses the Payload Data field according to the 
   encoding specified in section 3.5 above.

   If the received datagram is not compressed, the receiver needs to
   perform no decompression processing and the Payload Data field of the
   datagram is ready for processing by the next protocol layer.

   After a TLS record is received from the peer and decrypted, the
   RST and C/U bits MUST be checked.  

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004                [Page 9]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

   If the C/U bit is set to "1", the resulting compressed data block 
   MUST be decompressed according to section 3.5 above.  

   If the C/U bit is set to "0", the specified decompression history
   MUST be updated with the received uncompressed data.

   If the RST bit is set to "1", the receiving decompression history 
   MAY be reset to an initial state prior to decompressing the TLS 
   record.  (However, due to the characteristics of the Hifn LZS 
   algorithm, a decompression history reset is not required).
   After reset, any compressed or uncompressed data contained in the
   record is processed.

4.3.  Anti-Expansion Mechanism

   During compression, there are two options on how to handle 
   records that expand:

      1) Send the expanded data (as long as TLSCompressed.length is 
         17K or less) and maintain the history, thus allowing loss of 
         current bandwidth but preserving future bandwidth on the 
         link.

      2) Send the uncompressed data and do not clear the compression
         history; the decompressor will update its history, thus
         conserving the current bandwidth and future bandwidth on the
         link.
   The second option is the preferred option, and SHOULD be implemented.

   A third option:

      3) Send the uncompressed data and clear the history, thus
         conserving current bandwidth, but allowing possible loss of
         future bandwidth on the link.

   SHOULD NOT be implemented.

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004               [Page 10]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

5. Internationalization Considerations

   The compression method identifiers specified in this document are
   machine-readable numbers.  As such, issues of human
   internationalization and localization are not introduced.

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004               [Page 11]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

6. IANA Considerations

   Section 2 of RFC3749 [3] describes a registry of compression method
   identifiers to be maintained by the IANA and to be assigned within
   three zones.  

   IANA is requested to assign an identifier for the LZS compression 
   method from the RFC2434 Specification Required IANA pool as 
   described in sections 2 and 5 of RFC3749 [3].

   The IANA-assigned compression method identifier for LZS is TBD 
   decimal (0xTBD).

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004               [Page 12]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

7. Security Considerations

   This document does not introduce any topics that alter the threat
   model addressed by TLS.  The security considerations described
   throughout RFC 2246 [2] apply here as well.

   However, combining compression with encryption can sometimes reveal
   information that would not have been revealed without compression:
   data that is the same length before compression might be a different
   length after compression, so adversaries that observe the length of
   the compressed data might be able to derive information about the
   corresponding uncompressed data.  Some symmetric encryption
   ciphersuites do not hide the length of symmetrically encrypted data
   at all.  Others hide it to some extent, but still don't hide it
   fully.  For example, ciphersuites that use stream cipher encryption
   without padding do not hide length at all; ciphersuites that use
   Cipher Block Chaining (CBC) encryption with padding provide some
   length hiding, depending on how the amount of padding is chosen.  Use
   of TLS compression SHOULD take into account that the length of
   compressed data may leak more information than the length of the
   original uncompressed data.

   Another security issue to be aware of is that the LZS compression 
   history contains plaintext.  In order to prevent any kind of 
   information leakage to outside the system, when a TLS session with 
   compression terminates, the implementation SHOULD treat the 
   compression history as it does plaintext, that is, care should be 
   taken not to reveal the compression history in any form, or use it 
   again.  This is described both in sections 2.2 and 3.2 above.

   This information leakage concept can be extended to the situation of 
   sharing a single compression history across more than one TLS 
   session, as addressed in section 2.2 above.

   Other security issues are discussed in RFC3749 [3].

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004               [Page 13]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

8. Acknowledgements

   The concepts described in this document were derived from RFC 1967 
   [6], RFC 1974 [5], RFC 2395 [4], and RFC3749 [3].  The author 
   acknowledges the contributions of Scott Hollenbeck, Douglas Whiting,
   Russell Dietz, and the help from Steve Bellovin, Russ Housley, Eric 
   Rescorla.

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004               [Page 14]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

Normative References

   [1]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
        Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [2]  Dierks, T., Allen, C., Treese, W., Karlton, P., Freier, A.
        and P. Kocher, "The TLS Protocol Version 1.0", RFC 2246, 
        January 1999.

   [3]  Hollenbeck, S. " Transport Layer Security Protocol Compression 
        Methods", RFC3749, May 2004

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004               [Page 15]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

Informative References

   [4]  Friend, R., IP Payload Compression Using LZS", RFC 2395,
        December 1998.

   [5]  Friend, R., "PPP Stac LZS Compression Protocol", RFC 1974, August 1996.

   [6]  Friend, R., "PPP LZS-DCP Compression Protocol (LZS-DCP)", RFC 1967,
   August 1996.

   [7]  American National Standards Institute, Inc., "Data
        Compression Method for Information Systems," ANSI X3.241-
        1994, August 1994.

   [8]  Lempel, A., and Ziv, J., "A Universal Algorithm for
        Sequential Data Compression", IEEE Transactions On
        Information Theory, Vol.  IT-23, No. 3, September 1977.

Author's Address

   Robert Friend
   Hifn
   5973 Avenida Encinas
   Carlsbad, CA 92008
   US

   Email: rfriend@hifn.com

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004               [Page 16]

Internet-Draft          LZS Compression Method                 June 2004

Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  This document is subject
   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
   INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
   INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Intellectual Property

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable
   patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed,
   and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with
   RFC 3668.

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
   ipr@ietf.org.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.

Friend                  Expires December 4, 2004               [Page 17]