Skip to main content

Identity Header Error Handling
draft-wendt-stir-identity-header-errors-handling-00

The information below is for an old version of the document.
Document Type
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Replaced".
Author Chris Wendt
Last updated 2020-11-16
Replaced by draft-ietf-stir-identity-header-errors-handling, draft-ietf-stir-identity-header-errors-handling, RFC 9410
RFC stream (None)
Formats
Additional resources
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-wendt-stir-identity-header-errors-handling-00
Network Working Group                                           C. Wendt
Internet-Draft                                                   Comcast
Intended status: Standards Track                       November 16, 2020
Expires: May 20, 2021

                     Identity Header Error Handling
          draft-wendt-stir-identity-header-errors-handling-00

Abstract

   This document extends STIR and the Authenticated Identity Management
   in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) related to error handling
   for STIR verification services and how they feedback errors to STIR
   authentication services.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   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."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on May 20, 2021.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Wendt                     Expires May 20, 2021                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft               Identity Errors               November 2020

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  Use of provisional error responses to signal errors without
       terminating the call  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Handling of errors when there is multiple identity headers  .   3
   5.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5

1.  Introduction

   [RFC8224] in Section 6.2.2 discusses future specifications for
   enhancement of how errors are communicated and the handling of
   multiple identity headers.  This specification provides some
   additional mechanisms for solutions to address these problems.

   In some deployments of STIR and specifically using SIP [RFC3261] as
   defined by [RFC8224], one issue with the current error handling,
   specifically with the use of the defined 4xx error responses, is that
   when an error occurs with the verification of the identity header or
   the PASSporT contained in the identity header and a 4xx response is
   returned, the call is then terminated.  It may be the case that the
   policy for handling errors might be that calls should continue even
   if there is a verification error, in the case of, for example
   inadvertent errors, however the authentication service should still
   be notified of the error so that corrective action can be taken.
   This specification will discuss the use of reason header in
   subsequent provisional (1xx) responses in order to accomplish this.

   For the handling of multiple identity headers and the potential
   situation that some of the identity headers in a call may pass
   verification but others may have errors, this document provides a
   mechanism to add an identifier so that the authentication service can
   identify which identity header is being referred to in the case of an
   error.

2.  Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

Wendt                     Expires May 20, 2021                  [Page 2]
Internet-Draft               Identity Errors               November 2020

3.  Use of provisional error responses to signal errors without
    terminating the call

   In cases where local policy dictates that a call should not terminate
   when any verification errors, including errors described in [RFC8224]
   Section 6.2.2, then the verification service SHOULD include the error
   response code and reason phrase in a Reason header field, defined in
   [RFC3326], in the next provisional or final response sent to the
   authentication service.

   Example Reason header field:

   Reason: SIP ;cause=436 ;text="Bad Identity Info"

4.  Handling of errors when there is multiple identity headers

   In cases where a SIP message includes multiple identity headers and
   one or more of those identity headers has errors the verification
   service SHOULD include the error response code and reason phrase in a
   Reason header field, defined in [RFC3326], in the next provisional or
   final response sent to the authentication service.  The reason cause
   SHOULD represent at least one of the errors that occurred with one of
   the identity headers, but in order to identify each of the associated
   identity headers that had errors the body of the response should
   include a multipart MIME with each section including the PASSporT of
   the corresponding identity header.

   Example Reason header field with multipart MIME body:

Wendt                     Expires May 20, 2021                  [Page 3]
Internet-Draft               Identity Errors               November 2020

   Reason: SIP ;cause=436 ;text="Bad Identity Info"

   Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=boundary1
   Content-Length: ...

   --boundary1

   Content-Type: application/passport

   eyJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6InBhc3Nwb3J0IiwieDV1I \
   joiaHR0cHM6Ly9jZXJ0LmV4YW1wbGUub3JnL3Bhc3Nwb3J0LmNlciJ9.eyJ \
   kZXN0Ijp7InVyaSI6WyJzaXA6YWxpY2VAZXhhbXBsZS5jb20iXX0sImlhdC \
   I6IjE0NDMyMDgzNDUiLCJvcmlnIjp7InRuIjoiMTIxNTU1NTEyMTIifX0.r \
   q3pjT1hoRwakEGjHCnWSwUnshd0-zJ6F1VOgFWSjHBr8Qjpjlk-cpFYpFYs \
   ojNCpTzO3QfPOlckGaS6hEck7w

   --boundary1

   Content-Type: application/passport

   eyJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6InBhc3Nwb3J0IiwieDV1I \
   joiaHR0cHM6Ly9jZXJ0LmV4YW1wbGUub3JnL3Bhc3Nwb3J0LmNlciJ9.eyJ \
   kZXN0Ijp7InVyaSI6WyJzaXA6YWxpY2VAZXhhbXBsZS5jb20iXX0sImlhdC \
   I6IjE0NDMyMDgzNDUiLCJvcmlnIjp7InRuIjoiMTIxNTU1NTEyMTIifX0.r \
   q3pjT1hoRwakEGjHCnWSwUnshd0-zJ6F1VOgFWSjHBr8Qjpjlk-cpFYpFYs \
   ojNCpTzO3QfPOlckGaS6hEck7w

5.  Acknowledgements

   Would like to thank David Hancock for help to identify these error
   scenarios and Jon Peterson for helpful feedback.

6.  Security Considerations

   TBD

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [RFC3261]  Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
              A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
              Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC3261, June 2002,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3261>.

Wendt                     Expires May 20, 2021                  [Page 4]
Internet-Draft               Identity Errors               November 2020

   [RFC3326]  Schulzrinne, H., Oran, D., and G. Camarillo, "The Reason
              Header Field for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)",
              RFC 3326, DOI 10.17487/RFC3326, December 2002,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3326>.

   [RFC6919]  Barnes, R., Kent, S., and E. Rescorla, "Further Key Words
              for Use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", RFC 6919,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6919, April 2013,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6919>.

   [RFC7340]  Peterson, J., Schulzrinne, H., and H. Tschofenig, "Secure
              Telephone Identity Problem Statement and Requirements",
              RFC 7340, DOI 10.17487/RFC7340, September 2014,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7340>.

   [RFC7519]  Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web Token
              (JWT)", RFC 7519, DOI 10.17487/RFC7519, May 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7519>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

   [RFC8224]  Peterson, J., Jennings, C., Rescorla, E., and C. Wendt,
              "Authenticated Identity Management in the Session
              Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 8224,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8224, February 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8224>.

   [RFC8225]  Wendt, C. and J. Peterson, "PASSporT: Personal Assertion
              Token", RFC 8225, DOI 10.17487/RFC8225, February 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8225>.

7.2.  Informative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

Author's Address

Wendt                     Expires May 20, 2021                  [Page 5]
Internet-Draft               Identity Errors               November 2020

   Chris Wendt
   Comcast
   Comcast Technology Center
   Philadelphia, PA  19103
   USA

   Email: chris-ietf@chriswendt.net

Wendt                     Expires May 20, 2021                  [Page 6]