HIP Working Group P. Nikander
Internet-Draft G. Camarillo
Intended status: Experimental J. Melen
Expires: February 21, 2010 Ericsson
August 20, 2009
HIP (Host Identity Protocol) Immediate Carriage and Conveyance of Upper-
layer Protocol Signaling (HICCUPS)
draft-nikander-hip-hiccups-04
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
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/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on February 21, 2010.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document.
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
Abstract
This document defines a new HIP (Host Identity Protocol) packet type
called DATA. HIP DATA packets are used to securely and reliably
convey arbitrary protocol messages over the Internet and various
overlay networks.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Background on HIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. Message formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1.1. HIP fixed header . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1.2. HIP parameter format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2. HIP Base Exchange, Updates, and State Removal . . . . . . 5
3. Definition of the HIP DATA Packet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1. Definition of the SEQ_DATA Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2. Definition of the ACK_DATA Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.3. Definition of the PAYLOAD_MAC Parameter . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Generation and Reception of HIP DATA Packets . . . . . . . . . 10
4.1. Handling of SEQ_DATA and ACK_DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2. Generation of a HIP DATA packet . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.3. Reception of a HIP DATA packet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.3.1. Handling of SEQ_DATA in a Received HIP DATA packet . . 12
4.3.2. Handling of ACK_DATA in a Received HIP DATA packet . . 13
5. Use of the HIP DATA Packet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6. Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7. IANA considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9. Informative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
1. Introduction
Two hosts can use HIP [RFC5201] to establish a Security Association
(SA) between them in order to exchange arbitrary protocol messages
over that security association. The establishment of such a security
association involves a four-way handshake referred to as the HIP base
exchange. When handling communications between the hosts, HIP
supports mobility, multihoming, security, and NAT traversal. Some
applications require these features for their communications but
cannot accept the overhead involved in establishing a security
association (i.e., the HIP base exchange) before those communications
can start.
In this document, we define the HIP DATA packet, which can be used to
convey (in a secure and reliable way) protocol messages to a remote
host without running the HIP base exchange between them. We also
discuss the trade offs involved in using this packet (i.e., less
overhead but also less DoS protection) and the situations where it is
appropriate to use this packet. The HIP_DATA packet is not aimed to
be a replacement for ESP transport instead it SHOULD only be used to
exchange few packets between the peers. If a continuous
communication is required hosts SHOULD run the HIP base exchange to
set up ESP security association.
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
2. Background on HIP
The HIP protocol specification [RFC5201] defines a number of messages
and parameters. The parameters are encoded as TLVs, as shown in
Section 2.1.2. Furthermore, the HIP header carries a Next Header
field, allowing other arbitrary packets to be carried within HIP
packets.
2.1. Message formats
2.1.1. HIP fixed header
The HIP packet format consists of a fixed header followed by a
variable number of parameters. The parameter format is described in
Section 2.1.2.
The fixed header is defined in Section 5.1 of [RFC5201] and copied
below.
0 1 2 3
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Next Header | Header Length |0| Packet Type | VER. | RES.|1|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Checksum | Controls |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Sender's Host Identity Tag (HIT) |
| |
| |
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Receiver's Host Identity Tag (HIT) |
| |
| |
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
/ HIP Parameters /
/ /
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The HIP header is logically an IPv6 extension header. The HIP
protocol specification [RFC5201] defines handling only for Next
Header value decimal 59, IPPROTO_NONE, the IPv6 'no next header'
value. This document describes processing for Next Header values
other than decimal 59 which indicates that there is either more
extensions header or data following the HIP header.
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
2.1.2. HIP parameter format
The HIP parameter format is defined in Section 5.2.1 of [RFC5201],
and copied below.
0 1 2 3
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type |C| Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
/ Contents /
/ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type Type code for the parameter
C Critical bit, part of the Type.
Length Length of the parameter, in bytes.
Contents Parameter specific, defined by Type.
Padding Padding, 0-7 bytes, added if needed.
2.2. HIP Base Exchange, Updates, and State Removal
The HIP base exchange is a four-message half-stateless authentication
and key exchange protocol that creates shared, mutually authenticated
keying material at the communicating parties. These keying
materials, together with associated public keys and IP addresses,
form a HIP Security Association (SA). The details of the protocol
are defined in the HIP base exchange specification [RFC5201].
In addition to creating the HIP SA, the base exchange messages may
carry additional parameters that are used to create additional state.
For example, the HIP ESP specification [RFC5202] defines how HIP can
be used to create end-to-end, host-to-host IPsec ESP Security
Associations, used to carry data packets. However, it is important
to understand that the HIP base exchange is by no means bound to
IPsec; using IPsec ESP to carry data traffic forms just a baseline
and ensures interoperability between initial HIP implementations.
Once there is a HIP SA between two HIP-enabled hosts, they can
exchange further HIP control messages. Typically, UPDATE messages
are used. For example, the HIP mobility and multi-homing
specification [RFC5206] defines how to use UPDATE messages to change
the set of IP addresses associated with a HIP SA.
In addition to the base exchange and updates, the HIP base protocol
specification also defines how one can remove a HIP SA once it is no
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
longer needed.
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
3. Definition of the HIP DATA Packet
The HIP DATA packet can be used to convey protocol messages to a
remote host without running the HIP base exchange between them. HIP
DATA packets are transmitted reliably, as discussed in Section 4.
The payload of a HIP DATA packet is placed after the HIP header and
protected by a PAYLOAD_MAC parameter, which is defined in
Section 3.3. The following is the definition of the HIP DATA packet:
Header:
Packet Type = [ TBD by IANA: 32 ]
SRC HIT = Sender's HIT
DST HIT = Receiver's HIT
IP ( HIP ( [HOST_ID, ] SEQ_DATA, PAYLOAD_MAC,
HIP_SIGNATURE) PAYLOAD )
IP ( HIP ( [HOST_ID, ] SEQ_DATA, ACK_DATA, PAYLOAD_MAC,
HIP_SIGNATURE) PAYLOAD )
IP ( HIP ( [HOST_ID, ] ACK_DATA, HIP_SIGNATURE))
The SEQ_DATA and ACK_DATA parameters are defined in Section 3.1 and
Section 3.2 respectively. They are used to provide a reliable
delivery of HIP DATA packets, as discussed in Section 4.
The HOST_ID parameter is defined in Section 5.2.8 of [RFC5201]. This
parameter is the sender's Host Identifier that is used to compute the
HIP DATA packet's signature and to verify it against the received
signature.
The PAYLOAD_MAC parameter is defined in Section 3.3. This parameter
contains the HMAC of the payload carried by the HIP DATA packet. The
PAYLOAD_MAC contains the checksum of the payload following after the
HIP DATA. The PAYLOAD_MAC is included in the signed part of the HIP
DATA packet giving integrity protection also for the payload carried
after HIP DATA packet.
The HIP_SIGNATURE parameter is defined in Section 5.2.11. of
[RFC5201]. It contains a signature over the contents of the HIP DATA
packet. The calculation and verification of the signature is defined
Section 6.4.2. of [RFC5201]
Section 5.3 of [RFC5201] states the following:
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
In the future, an OPTIONAL upper-layer payload MAY follow the HIP
header. The Next Header field in the header indicates if there is
additional data following the HIP header.
We have chosen to place the payload after the HIP extension header
and only to place an HMAC of the payload in to the HIP extension
header in a PAYLOAD_MAC parameter because that way the data is
protected by a public key signature with help of HMAC. The payload
that is protected by the PAYLOAD_MAC parameter has been linked to the
appropriate upper-layer protocol by storing the upper-layer protocol
number, 8 bytes of payload data, and by calculating an HMAC over the
data. The HMAC algorithm is same as the algorithm used to generate
the Host Identity Tag.
3.1. Definition of the SEQ_DATA Parameter
The following is the definition of the SEQ_DATA parameter:
0 1 2 3
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Sequence number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type [ TBD by IANA:
4481 = (2^12 + 2^8 + 2^7 + 1) ]
Length 4
Sequence number 32-bit sequence number
3.2. Definition of the ACK_DATA Parameter
The following is the definition of the ACK_DATA parameter:
0 1 2 3
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Acked Sequence number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type [ TBD by IANA:
4545 = (2^12 + 2^8 + 2^7 + 2^6 + 1) ]
Length 4
Acked Sequence number 32-bit sequence number corresponding to
the sequence number being acknowledged
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
3.3. Definition of the PAYLOAD_MAC Parameter
The following is the definition of the PAYLOAD_MAC parameter:
0 1 2 3
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Next header | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Payload Data |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
/ Payload HMAC /
/ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type [ TBD by IANA:
4577 = (2^12 + 2^8 + 2^7 + 2^6 + 2^5 + 1) ]
Length length in octets, excluding Type, Length, and
Padding
Next Header Identifies the data that protected by this HMAC.
The values for are defined by IANA "Assigned
Numbers".
Payload Data 8 last bytes of the payload data over which the
HMAC is calculated. This field is used to
uniquely identify the extension header, in case
there are multiple copies of same type.
Payload HMAC HMAC computed over the data to which the Next
Header and Payload Data points to. The size of
the HMAC is the natural size of the computation
output depending on the used function.
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
4. Generation and Reception of HIP DATA Packets
HIP DATA packets are transmitted reliably. Reliable delivery is
achieved through the use of retransmissions and of the SEQ_DATA and
ACK_DATA parameters.
4.1. Handling of SEQ_DATA and ACK_DATA
A HIP DATA packet contains zero or one SEQ_DATA parameter. The
presence of a SEQ_DATA parameter indicates that the receiver MUST ACK
the HIP DATA packet. A HIP DATA packet that does not contain a
SEQ_DATA parameter is simply an ACK of a previous HIP DATA packet and
MUST NOT be ACKed.
A HIP DATA packet contains zero or one ACK_DATA parameters. The ACK
parameter echoes the SEQ_DATA sequence number of the HIP DATA packet
packet being ACKed.
A HIP DATA packet may contain both a SEQ_DATA and an ACK_DATA
parameter. In this case, the ACK is being piggybacked on an outgoing
HIP DATA packet. In general, HIP DATA packets carrying SEQ_DATA
SHOULD be ACKed upon completion of the processing of the HIP DATA
packet. A host MAY choose to hold the HIP DATA packet carrying ACK
for a short period of time to allow for the possibility of
piggybacking the ACK parameter, in a manner similar to TCP delayed
acknowledgments.
4.2. Generation of a HIP DATA packet
When a host has upper-layer protocol data to send, it either runs the
HIP base exchange and sends the data over a SA, or sends the data
directly using a HIP DATA packet. Section 5 discusses when it is
appropriate to use each method. This section discusses the case when
the host chooses to use a HIP DATA packet to send the upper-layer
protocol data.
1. The host creates a HIP DATA packet that contains a SEQ_DATA
parameter. The host is free to choose any value for the SEQ_DATA
parameter in the first HIP DATA packet it sends to a destination.
After that first packet, the host MUST choose the value of the
SEQ_DATA parameter in subsequent HIP DATA packets to the same
destination so that no SEQ_DATA value is reused before the
receiver has closed the processing window for the previous packet
using the same SEQ_DATA value. Practically, giving the values of
the retransmission timers used with HIP DATA packets, this means
that hosts must wait the maximum likely lifetime of the packet
before reusing a given SEQ_DATA value towards a given
destination. However, it is not required for node to know the
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
maximum packet lifetime. Rather, it is assumed that the
requirement can be met by maintaining the value as a simple, 32-
bit, "wrap-around" counter, incremented each time a packet is
sent. It is an implementation choice whether to maintain a
single counter for the node or multiple counters (one for each
source HIT, destination HIT combination).
2. The host creates PAYLOAD_HMAC parameter. The HMAC is calculated
over the whole PAYLOAD which the Next Header field of
PAYLOAD_HMAC parameter indicates. The receiver MUST validate
this HMAC. For calculating the HMAC the host MUST use the same
hash algorithm as the one that has been used for generating the
host's HIT as defined in Section 3.2. of [RFC5201].
3. The host creates HIP_SIGNATURE parameter. The signature is
calculated over the whole HIP envelope, excluding any parameters
after the HIP_SIGNATURE, as defined in Section 5.2.11. of
[RFC5201]. The receiver MUST validate this signature. It MAY
use either the HI in the packet or the HI acquired by some other
means.
4. The hosts sends the created HIP DATA packet and starts a DATA
timer. The default value for the timer is 2 * RTT estimate. If
multiple HIP DATA packets are outstanding, multiple timers are in
effect.
5. If the DATA timer expires, the HIP DATA packet is resent. The
HIP DATA packet can be resent DATA_RETRY_MAX times. The DATA
timer SHOULD be exponentially backed off for subsequent
retransmissions. If no acknowledgment is received from the peer
after DATA_RETRY_MAX times, the delivery of the HIP DATA packet
is considered unsuccessful and the application is notified about
the error. The DATA timer is canceled upon receiving an ACK from
the peer that acknowledges receipt of the HIP DATA packet.
4.3. Reception of a HIP DATA packet
A host receiving a HIP DATA packet to decide whether to process it or
not. If the host, following its local policy, suspects that this
packet could be part of a DoS attack. The host MAY respond with an
R1 packet to the HIP DATA packet, if the packet contained SEQ_DATA
and PAYLOAD_HMAC parameter, in order to run the HIP base exchange
with the originator of the HIP DATA packet. If the host chooses to
respond to the HIP DATA with an R1 packet, it creates a new R1 or
selects a precomputed R1 according to the format described in
[RFC5201] Section 5.3.2. The host SHOULD drop the received data
packet if it responded with a R1 packet to the HIP_DATA packet. The
sender of HIP_DATA packet is responsible of retransmission of the
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
upper-layer protocol data after successful completion of the HIP Base
Exchange.
If the host, following its local policy, decides to process the
incoming HIP DATA packet, it processes it according to the following
rules:
If the HIP DATA packet contains a SEQ_DATA parameter and no
ACK_DATA parameter, the HIP DATA packet is processed and replied
to as described in Section 4.3.1.
If the HIP DATA packet contains an ACK_DATA parameter and no
SEQ_DATA parameter, the HIP DATA packet is processed and replied
to as described in Section 4.3.2.
If the HIP DATA packet contains both a SEQ_DATA parameter and an
ACK_DATA parameter, the HIP DATA packet is processed first as
described in Section 4.3.2 and then the rest of the HIP DATA
packet is processed and replied to as described in Section 4.3.1.
4.3.1. Handling of SEQ_DATA in a Received HIP DATA packet
The following steps define the conceptual processing rules for
handling a SEQ_DATA parameter in a received HIP DATA packet.
If the value in the received SEQ_DATA corresponds to a HIP DATA
packet that has recently been processed, the packet is treated as a
retransmission. The SIGNATURE verification (next step) MUST NOT be
skipped. (A byte-by-byte comparison of the received and a stored
packet would be OK, though.) It is recommended that a host cache HIP
DATA packets sent with ACKs to avoid the cost of generating a new ACK
packet to respond to a retransmitted HIP DATA packet. The host MUST
acknowledge, again, such (apparent) HIP DATA packet retransmissions
but SHOULD also consider rate-limiting such retransmission responses
to guard against replay attacks.
The system MUST verify the SIGNATURE in the HIP DATA packet. If the
verification fails, the packet SHOULD be dropped and an error message
logged.
The system MUST verify the PAYLOAD_HMAC by calculating the HMAC over
the PAYLOAD which the Next Header field indicates. For calculating
the HMAC the host will use the same hash algorithm that has been used
to generate the sender's HIT as defined in Section 3.2. of [RFC5201].
If the verification fails, the packet SHOULD be dropped and an error
message logged.
If a new SEQ parameter is being processed, the parameters in the HIP
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
DATA packet are then processed.
A HIP DATA packet with an ACK_DATA parameter is prepared and sent to
the peer. This ACK_DATA parameter may be included in a separate HIP
DATA packet or piggybacked in a HIP DATA packet with a SEQ_DATA
parameter. The ACK_DATA parameter MAY acknowledge more than one of
the peer's HIP DATA packets.
4.3.2. Handling of ACK_DATA in a Received HIP DATA packet
The following steps define the conceptual processing rules for
handling an ACK_DATA parameter in a received HIP DATA packet.
The sequence number reported in the ACK_DATA must match with an
earlier sent HIP DATA packet that has not already been acknowledged.
If no match is found or if the ACK_DATA does not acknowledge a new
HIP DATA packet, the packet MUST either be dropped if no SEQ_DATA
parameter is present, or the processing steps in Section 4.3.1 are
followed.
The system MUST verify the SIGNATURE in the HIP DATA packet. If the
verification fails, the packet SHOULD be dropped and an error message
logged.
The corresponding DATA timer is stopped so that the now acknowledged
HIP DATA packet is no longer retransmitted. If multiple HIP DATA
packets are newly acknowledged, multiple timers are stopped.
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
5. Use of the HIP DATA Packet
HIP currently requires always that the four-message base exchange is
executed at the first encounter of hosts that have not communicated
before. This may add additional RTTs (Round Trip Time) to protocols
based on a single message exchange. However, the four-message
exchange is essential to preserve the half-stateless DoS protection
nature of the base exchange. The use of the HIP DATA packet defined
in this document reduces the initial overhead in the communications
between two hosts at the expense of decreasing DoS protection.
Therefore, applications SHOULD NOT use HIP DATA packets in
environments where DoS attacks are believed to be an issue. For
example, a HIP-based overlay may have policies in place to control
which nodes can join the overlay. Any particular node in the overlay
may want to accept HIP DATA packets from other nodes in the overlay
given that those other were authorized to join the overlay. However,
the same node may not want to accept HIP DATA packets from random
nodes that are not part of the overlay.
The type of data to be sent is also relevant to whether the use of a
HIP DATA packet is appropriate. HIP itself does not support
fragmentation but relies on underlying IP-layer fragmentation. This
may lead to reliability problems in the case where a message cannot
be easily split over multiple HIP messages. Therefore, applications
in environments where fragmentation could be an issue SHOULD NOT
generate too large HIP DATA packets that may lead to fragmentation.
The implementation SHOULD check the MTU of the link before sending
the packet and if the packet size is larger than MTU it SHOULD signal
to the upper-layer protocol if the packet results in to a ICMP error
message. Note that there are environments where fragmentation is not
an issue. For example, in some HIP-based overlays, nodes can
exchange HIP DATA packets on top of TCP connections that provide
transport-level fragmentation and, thus, avoid IP-level
fragmentation.
HIP currently requires that all messages excluding I1s but including
HIP DATA packets are digitally signed. This adds to the packet size
and the processing capacity needed to send packets. However, in
applications where security is not paramount, it is possible to use
very short keys, thereby reducing resource consumption.
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
6. Security considerations
HIP is designed to provide secure authentication of hosts. HIP also
attempts to limit the exposure of the host to various denial-of-
service and man-in-the-middle (MitM) attacks. However, HIP DATA
packet, which can be sent without running the HIP base exchange
between hosts has a trade off that it does not provide the denial-of-
service protection that HIP generally provides. Thus, the host
should consider always situations where it is appropriate to send or
receive HIP DATA packet. If the communication consists more than few
round-trips of data or the data is highly sensitive in nature the
host SHOULD run the base exchange with the peer host.
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
7. IANA considerations
This document updates the IANA Registry for HIP Packet types by
introducing new packet type for the new HIP_DATA (Section 3) packet.
This document updates the IANA Registry for HIP Parameter Types by
introducing new parameter values for the SEQ_DATA (Section 3.1),
ACK_DATA (Section 3.2), and PAYLOAD_HMAC (Section 3.3) parameters.
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
8. Acknowledgments
In the usual IETF fashion, a large number of people have contributed
to the actual text or ideas. The list of these people include Miika
Komu, Tobias Heer, Ari Keraenen, Samu Varjonen, Thomas Henderson, and
Jukka Ylitalo. Our apologies to anyone whose name is missing.
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
9. Informative references
[RFC5201] Moskowitz, R., Nikander, P., Jokela, P., and T. Henderson,
"Host Identity Protocol", RFC 5201, April 2008.
[RFC5202] Jokela, P., Moskowitz, R., and P. Nikander, "Using the
Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) Transport Format with
the Host Identity Protocol (HIP)", RFC 5202, April 2008.
[RFC5206] Nikander, P., Henderson, T., Vogt, C., and J. Arkko, "End-
Host Mobility and Multihoming with the Host Identity
Protocol", RFC 5206, April 2008.
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft HICCUPS August 2009
Authors' Addresses
Pekka Nikander
Ericsson
Hirsalantie 11
Jorvas 02420
Finland
Email: Pekka.Nikander@ericsson.com
Gonzalo Camarillo
Ericsson
Hirsalantie 11
Jorvas 02420
Finland
Email: Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com
Jan Melen
Ericsson
Hirsalantie 11
Jorvas 02420
Finland
Email: Jan.Melen@ericsson.com
Nikander, et al. Expires February 21, 2010 [Page 19]