Network Working Group R. Gagliano
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems
Updates: 3971 (if approved) S. Krishnan
Intended status: Standards Track Ericsson
Expires: December 4, 2010 A. Kukec
University of Zagreb
June 2, 2010
Subject Key Identifier (SKI) SEND Name Type fields.
draft-ietf-csi-send-name-type-registry-05
Abstract
SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND) defines the Name Type field in the
ICMPv6 Trust Anchor option. This document specifies new Name Type
fields based on certificate Subject Key Identifiers (SKI).
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 http://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 December 4, 2010.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2010 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
(http://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
Gagliano, et al. Expires December 4, 2010 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft SEND Name Type Registry June 2010
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Name Type fields in the ICMPv6 TA option defined in this
document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Processing Rules for Routers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Gagliano, et al. Expires December 4, 2010 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft SEND Name Type Registry June 2010
1. Requirements notation
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 [RFC2119] .
2. Introduction
SEcure Neighbor Discovery [RFC3971] (SEND) utilizes X.509v3
certificates that include the [RFC3779] extension for IPv6 addresses
to certify a router's authority over an IPv6 prefix for the NDP
(Neighbor Discovery Protocol). The Trust Anchor (TA) Option in
section 6.4.3 of [RFC3971] allows the identification of the Trust
Anchor selected by the host. In that same section, two name types
were defined: the DER Encoded X.501 Name and a Fully Qualified Domain
Name (FQDN).
In any Public Key Infrastructure, the subject name of a certificate
is only unique within each CA. Consequently, a new option to
identify TAs across CAs is needed.
In [I-D.ietf-csi-send-cert] the certificate profile described in
[I-D.ietf-sidr-res-certs] is adopted for SEND. In these documents,
the Subject field in the certificates is declared to be meaningless
and the subjectAltName field is not allowed. On the other hand, the
Subject Key Identifier (SKI) extension for the X.509 certificates is
defined as mandatory and non-critical.
This document specifies new Name Type fields in the SEND TA option
that allows the use of the SKI X.509 extension to identify TA X.509
certificates. This document also defines experimental and reserved
Name Types values.
Finally, this document updates the [RFC3971] by changing the Name
Type field in the ICMPv6 Trust Anchor option registration procedures
from Standards Action to Standards Action or IESG Approval.
3. Name Type fields in the ICMPv6 TA option defined in this document
The following Name Type fields in the ICMPv6 TA option are defined:
Gagliano, et al. Expires December 4, 2010 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft SEND Name Type Registry June 2010
Name Type Description
0 Reserved
3 SHA-1 Subject Key Identifier (SKI).
4 SHA-224 Subject Key Identifier (SKI).
5 SHA-256 Subject Key Identifier (SKI).
6 SHA-384 Subject Key Identifier (SKI).
7 SHA-512 Subject Key Identifier (SKI).
253-254 Experimental
255 Reserved
Name Type field values 0 and 255 are marked as reserved. This means
that they are not available for allocation.
When the Name Type field is set to 3, the Name Type field contains a
160-bit SHA-1 hash of the value of the DER-encoded ASN.1 bit string
of the subject public key, as described in Section 3.9.2 of
[I-D.ietf-sidr-res-certs]. Implementations MAY support SHA-1 SKI
name type.
When the Name Type field is set to 4,5,6 or 7, the hash function will
respectively be: SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384 or SHA-512.
Implementations MAY support SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-284 and SHA-512 SKI
name types.
Name Type fields 253 and 254 are marked as experimental, following
[RFC3692].
4. Processing Rules for Routers
As specified in [RFC3971], a TA is identified by the SEND TA option.
If the TA option is represented as a SKI, then the SKI MUST be equal
to the X.509 SKI extension in the trust anchor's certificate. The
router SHOULD include the TA option(s) in the advertisement for which
the certification path was found. Also, following [RFC3971]
specification, if the router is unable to find a path to the
requested anchor, it SHOULD send an advertisement without any
certificate. In this case, the router SHOULD include the TA options
that were solicited.
5. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to update the Name Type field in the ICMPv6 Trust
Anchor option registry by adding the following values:
Gagliano, et al. Expires December 4, 2010 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft SEND Name Type Registry June 2010
+---------+----------------------------------------------------+
| Value | Description |
+---------+----------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | Reserved ( Section 3 ) |
| 3 | SHA-1 Subject Key Identifier (SKI) ( Section 3 ) |
| 4 | SHA-224 Subject Key Identifier (SKI) ( Section 3 ) |
| 5 | SHA-256 Subject Key Identifier (SKI) ( Section 3 ) |
| 6 | SHA-384 Subject Key Identifier (SKI) ( Section 3 ) |
| 7 | SHA-512 Subject Key Identifier (SKI) ( Section 3 ) |
| 253-254 | Experimental use ( Section 3 ) |
| 255 | Reserved ( Section 3 ) |
+---------+----------------------------------------------------+
Table 1: New Name Type field values in the ICMPv6 TA option
IANA is also requested to modify the registration procedures for the
Name Type field in the ICMPv6 Trust Anchor option registry to
Standard Action or IESG Approval.
6. Security Considerations
The hash functions referenced in this document to calculate the SKI
have reasonable random properties in order to provide reasonably
unique identifiers. Two identical identifiers in the same validation
path will cause the router to stop fetching certificates once the
first certificate has been fetched. In the case that the upward
certificate was configured as TA by a host, the router will send to
this host an incomplete list of certificates, causing the SEND
validation to fail.
For experimental values of the Name Type field, the guidance given in
[RFC3692] about the use of experimental values needs to be followed.
7. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-csi-send-cert]
Gagliano, R., Krishnan, S., and A. Kukec, "Certificate
profile and certificate management for SEND",
draft-ietf-csi-send-cert-03 (work in progress),
March 2010.
[I-D.ietf-sidr-res-certs]
Huston, G., Michaelson, G., and R. Loomans, "A Profile for
X.509 PKIX Resource Certificates",
draft-ietf-sidr-res-certs-18 (work in progress), May 2010.
Gagliano, et al. Expires December 4, 2010 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft SEND Name Type Registry June 2010
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3692] Narten, T., "Assigning Experimental and Testing Numbers
Considered Useful", BCP 82, RFC 3692, January 2004.
[RFC3779] Lynn, C., Kent, S., and K. Seo, "X.509 Extensions for IP
Addresses and AS Identifiers", RFC 3779, June 2004.
[RFC3971] Arkko, J., Kempf, J., Zill, B., and P. Nikander, "SEcure
Neighbor Discovery (SEND)", RFC 3971, March 2005.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008.
[RFC5280] Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S.,
Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key
Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List
(CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, May 2008.
Authors' Addresses
Roque Gagliano
Cisco Systems
Avenue des Uttins 5
Rolle, 1180
Switzerland
Email: rogaglia@cisco.com
Suresh Krishnan
Ericsson
8400 Decarie Blvd.
Town of Mount Royal, QC
Canada
Phone: +1 514 345 7900 x42871
Email: suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com
Gagliano, et al. Expires December 4, 2010 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft SEND Name Type Registry June 2010
Ana Kukec
University of Zagreb
Unska 3
Zagreb
Croatia
Email: ana.kukec@fer.hr
Gagliano, et al. Expires December 4, 2010 [Page 7]