One document matched: draft-adrangi-radius-chargeable-user-identity-01.txt

Differences from draft-adrangi-radius-chargeable-user-identity-00.txt



   Network Working Group                            Farid Adrangi  
   INTERNET DRAFT                                   Intel Corporation 
   Category: Informational (or standards?)          Avi Lior 
   Expires: Feb 27, 2005                            Bridgewater Systems      
                                                    Jouni Korhonen  
                                                    Teliasonera 
                                                    Sept 27, 2004 
                 
                            Chargeable User Identity 
              draft-adrangi-radius-chargeable-user-identity-01.txt 
                                            
    
   Status of this Memo 
    
     This document is an Internet-Draft and is subject to all 
     provisions of section 3 of RFC 3667.  By submitting this Internet-
     Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other 
     IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be 
     disclosed, and any of which he or she become aware will be 
     disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668. 
      
     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. 
         
    
   Copyright Notice 
    
      Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). 
         
   Abstract 
 
   This document describes a new RADIUS attribute used by a home RADIUS 
   to indicate Chargeable User Identity to all parties involved in the 
   roaming transaction outside the home network. 
    
    
   Table of Contents 
    
   1. Introduction...................................................2 
     
   Adrangi, et al.          Expires Feb 27, 2005             [Page 1] 

    
   Internet Draft   RADIUS Chargeable User Identity      27 Sept 2004 
               
 
   1.1 Requirements language..........................................3 
   2. Operation.......................................................3 
   2.1 Chargeable User Identity Attribute.............................3 
   3. Diameter RADIUS Interoperability................................6 
   4. IANA Considerations.............................................6 
   5. Security Considerations.........................................6 
   6. Acknowledgements................................................6 
   7. References......................................................6 
   AuthorsÆ Addresses.................................................7 
 
 
    
   1. Introduction  
    
     In certain authentication methods such as, EAP-PEAP or EAP-TTLS, 
     EAP-SIM, and EAP-AKA, the true identity of the subscriber can be 
     hidden from the RADIUS AAA servers outside the subscriberÆs home 
     network.  In these methods the User-Name(1) attribute contains an 
     anonymous identity (e.g., @example.com) sufficient to route the 
     RADIUS packets to the home network but otherwise insufficient to 
     identify the subscriber.  While this mechanism is good practice 
     there could be problems.  Because Local and intermediate networks 
     may require a user identity in order to enforce usage policies. 
     For example, local or intermediate networks may wish to implement 
     a limit on simultaneous sessions, and/or may require a billable 
     user identity in order to demonstrate willingness to pay and limit 
     the potential for fraud. 
 
     This basically implies that a unique identity known by the home 
     network needs to be conveyed to all parties involved in the 
     roaming transaction for correlating the authentication and 
     accounting packets. 
      
     Providing a unique identity to intermediaries is therefore a 
     requirement to fulfill certain business needs.  This fulfillment 
     need not undermine the need to protect the anonymity of the user.  
     The mechanism provided by this draft allows the home operator to 
     meet these business requirements by providing a temporal identity 
     representing the subscriber and at the same time protecting the 
     anonymity of the subscriber. 
      
     Standard RADIUS Class(25) or User-Name(1) attributes could be used 
     to indicate the CUI.  However, in a complex global roaming 
     environment where there could be one or more intermediary between 
     the NAS and the home RADIUS server, the use of aforementioned 
     attributes could lead to problems as described below. 
      
      
        O On use of RADIUS Class (25) attribute, [1] states ôThis 
        Attribute is available to be sent by the server to the client 
        in an Access-Accept and SHOULD be sent unmodified by the client 
        to the accounting server as part of the Accounting-Request 
  
   Adrangi, et al.        Expires February 27, 2005           [Page 2] 

    
   Internet Draft   RADIUS Chargeable User Identity      27 Sept 2004 
               
 
        packet if accounting is supported. The client MUST NOT 
        interpret the attribute locally.ö  So RADIUS clients MUST NOT 
        interpret the Class attribute, which precludes determining 
        whether it contains a chargeable identity. 
      
        O On use of RADIUS UserName(1), the home network could use 
        UserName(1) in the Access Accept message to convey the 
        chargeable user identity to intermediaries and the NAS.  
        However, as the Access-Accept packet is routed to the NAS, the 
        UserName(1) attribute could be (completely) rewritten by an 
        intermediary and therefore the NAS or other intermediaries 
        along the way will not have access to the CUI.  Furthermore, 
        the NAS may use the original value of the UserName attribute ( 
        the one sent in the Access-Request packet) in the Accounting-
        Request packets.  In this case, intermediaries will not have 
        access to the CUI. 
      
     The Chargeable User Identity (CUI) attribute provides a solution 
     to the above problem and avoids overloading the use of current 
     RADIUS attributes (e.g., UserName(1) re-write).  When the home 
     network assigns a value to the CUI it asserts that this value 
     represents a user in the home network.  The assertion should be 
     temporary.  Long enough to be useful for the external applications 
     and not too long to such that it can be used to identify the user. 
    
     
   1.1 Requirements language 
 
      In this document, several words are used to signify the 
      requirements of the specification.  These words are often 
      capitalized.  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. Operation 
 
     This document assumes that the RADIUS protocol operates as 
     specified in [1, 2] and the Diameter protocol as specified in[RFC 
     3588, NASREQ]. 
 
 
   2.1 Chargeable User Identity Attribute 
    
      This attribute serves as an alias to the userÆs identity. It is 
      assigned by the home RADIUS server and MAY be sent in Access-
      Accept message.  The NAS or the access network AAA server MUST 
      include  this  attribute  in  the  Accounting  Requests  (Start, 
      Interim, and Stop) messages if it was included in the Access 
      Accept message.  Entities (e.g., NASes, proxies) outside the home 
      network MUST NOT modify the Chargeable User Identity attribute. 
  
   Adrangi, et al.        Expires February 27, 2005           [Page 3] 

    
   Internet Draft   RADIUS Chargeable User Identity      27 Sept 2004 
               
 
       
      In cases where the home RADIUS server cannot determine the NAS 
      support for CUI attribute, it MUST send both the UserName (1) 
      attribute and CUI attribute, with the understanding that if the 
      NAS supports the CUI attribute the CUI attribute will override 
      the identity portion the UserName (1) attribute.  That is, the 
      UserName(1) attribute will be used for routing and the CUI 
      attribute will be used for identity purposes. 
       
       
      If the RADIUS server includes this attribute in an Access-Accept 
      message it MAY also use this attribute as one of the identity 
      attributes in a Disconnect Message and Change of Authorization 
      message defined by [4]. 
       
      A summary of the RADIUS Chargeable User Identity Attribute is 
      given below. 
       
       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     | String...          
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    
        Name 
           
           Chargeable User Identity 
         
        Type 
         
           To be assigned by IANA 
         
        Length 
         
           >= 6 
         
        String 
 
           The string identifies the CUI of the end-user and is of type 
           UTF8String. It consists of two colon separated parts. The 
           first part determines the Chargeable-User-Identity type and 
           the  second  part  is  the  actual  Chargeable-User-Identity 
           value. The Chargeable-User-Identity type is coded as two 
           octet string. The Chargeable-User-Identity value must be at 
           least one octet. 
            
           The following User-Identity types have been defined: 
            
           00 û E.164 number  
                  The  identifier  is  in  international  E.164  format  
                  (e.g. MSISDN, according to the ITU-T E.164  
                  numbering plan as defined in [6] and [7]). 
           01 û IMSI  
  
   Adrangi, et al.        Expires February 27, 2005           [Page 4] 

    
   Internet Draft   RADIUS Chargeable User Identity      27 Sept 2004 
               
 
                  The is in international IMSI format according to the 
                  ITU-T E.212 numbering plan as defined in [8] and 
                  [9]). 
           02 û SIP URL  
                  The identifier is in the form of a SIP URI as defined 
                  (as defined in [10]). 
            
           03 û NAI  
                  The identifier is in the form of a Network Access 
                  Identifier as defined in [5]. 
           04 û Opaque string 
            
                  Opaque string is a value that is assigned to the user 
                  by the home network in an unspecified format. where 
                  the home network asserts that this value represents a 
                  particular user û itÆs a handle to the user.   
           05 û reserved 
    
           The length of time for which the Chargeable User Identity is 
           valid is unspecified by this specification and typically 
           would be long enough to serve some business needs and short 
           enough such that it minimizes the chance of revealing the 
           true identity of the user (either directly or indirectly).  
            
           Below are examples of Chargeable User Identity strings with 
           NAI and E.164 Charging Types: 
            
             ö02:charging-id@realm.orgö 
             ö03:+4689761234ö 
             ö05:charging-idö 
            
           Ideally, the real user identity should not be revealed 
           through this attribute.  However, the operators will have 
           the final word on the used charging type and its identifier.  
            
       
     The following table provides a guide to which attribute(s) may be 
     found in which kinds of packets, and in what quantity.   
    
    
   Request Accept Reject Challenge Accounting  #  Attribute 
                                   Request 
     0      0-1     0       0        0-1       TBD  Chargeable User ID  
    
   [Note 1] If the Access Accept contains Chargeable-User-Identity then 
   the NAS MUST include the Chargeable-User-Identity in Accounting 
   Requests (Start, Interim and Stop) packets. 
    
    
   Change of Authorization and Disconnect-Request 
   Request      ACK      NAK   #    Attribute 
      0-1       0        0     TBD  Chargeable User 
  
   Adrangi, et al.        Expires February 27, 2005           [Page 5] 

    
   Internet Draft   RADIUS Chargeable User Identity      27 Sept 2004 
               
 
    
   [Note 2] Where Chargeable-User-Identity attribute is included in 
   Disconnect-Request or CoA-Request messages, it is used for session 
   identification purposes only.  This attribute MUST NOT be used for 
   purposes other than identification (e.g. within CoA-Request messages 
   to request authorization changes).  
 
   3. Diameter RADIUS Interoperability 
 
      In deployments where both RADIUS clients talking with Diameter 
      Servers or Diameter Client talking with RADIUS server then a 
      translation agent will be deployed and operate in accordance to 
      the NASREQ specification. A counterpart Diameter AVP with a 
      similar content to Chargeable-User-Identity is Diameter Credit-
      Control ApplicationÆs Subscription-ID AVP [11]. 
 
   4. IANA Considerations 
 
     This document requires the assignment of a new RADIUS attribute  
     number for the Chargeable User Identity attribute.         
 
   5. Security Considerations 
    
     The Chargeable-User-Identity attribute must be protected against 
     Man-in-the-Middle attacks.  The Chargeable-User-Identity appears 
     in Access-Accept and Accounting Requests packets and is protected 
     by the mechanisms that are defined for RADIUS [1] and [2].  
     Therefore there are no additional security considerations beyond 
     those already identified in [1] and [2]. 
      
     Message-Authenticator (80) and Event-Timestamp can be used to 
     further protect against Man-in-the-middle attacks. 
      
     In this document we require that entities outside the home network 
     not modify the value of this attribute yet there are no provisions 
     for protecting against or detecting that a RADIUS Proxy has 
     modified the attribute.   
      
    
   6. Acknowledgements 
 
      The authors would like to thank Jari Arkko (of Ericsson), Bernard 
      Aboba (of Microsoft), Blair Bullock (of iPass), Sami Ala-luukko 
      (of Teliasonera), Eugene Chang (of Funk), Mark Grayson (of 
      Cisco), David Mariblanca for their feedback and guidance.  
    
    
   7. References 
 
     [1]  Rigney, C., Rubens, A., Simpson, W. and S. Willens, "Remote    
          Authentication Dial In User Server (RADIUS)", RFC 2865, June  
          2000.  
  
   Adrangi, et al.        Expires February 27, 2005           [Page 6] 

    
   Internet Draft   RADIUS Chargeable User Identity      27 Sept 2004 
               
 
                        
     [2]  Rigney, C., "RADIUS Accounting", RFC 2866, June 2000.  
                        
     [3]  Rigney, C., Willats, W., Calhoun, P., "RADIUS Extensions",  
          RFC 2869, June 2000.  
    
     [4] Chiba, M., Dommety, G., Eklud, M., Mitton, D., Aboba, B.,  
         öDynamic Authorization Extensions to Remote Authentication 
         Dial In User Service (RADIUS)ö, RFC 3576, July 2003. 
          
     [5] Aboba, B., Beadles, M., Arkko, J. and P. Eronen, "The Network 
         Access Identifier", draft-arkko-roamops-rfc2486bis-02 (work in 
         progress), July 2004. 
    
     [6] Recommendation E.164/I.331 (05/97): The International Public 
         Telecommunication Numbering Plan. 1997.   
          
     [7] Complement to ITU-T Recommendation E.164 (05/1997):"List of 
         ITU-T Recommendation E.164 assigned country codes", June 2000.   
          
     [8] Recommendation E.212 (11/98): The international   
         identification plan for mobile terminals and mobile users. 
         1998.   
          
     [9] Complement to ITU-T Recommendation E.212 (11/1997):" List of 
         mobile country or geographical area codes ", February 1999.    
    
     [10] M. Handley, H. Schulzrinne, E. Schooler, J. Rosenberg,  
          G. Camarillo, A. Johnston, J. Peterson, R. Sparks   
          "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261. June 2002.               
 
     [11] Hakala, H., Mattila, L., Koskinen, J.-P., Stura M., and 
         Loughney J., "Diameter Credit-Control Application", draft-
         ietf-aaa-diameter-cc-06.txt (work in progress), September 
         2004. 
 
    
 
                           
   AuthorsÆ Addresses 
    
         Farid Adrangi  
         Intel Corporation  
         2111 N.E. 25th Avenue  
         Hillsboro  OR  
         USA  
    
         Phone:  503-712-1791   
         Email:  farid.adrangi@intel.com 
    
         Avi Lior  
         Bridgewater Systems Corporation  
  
   Adrangi, et al.        Expires February 27, 2005           [Page 7] 

    
   Internet Draft   RADIUS Chargeable User Identity      27 Sept 2004 
               
 
         303 Terry Fox Drive  
         Suite 100  
         Ottawa, Ontario  K2K 3J1  
         Canada  
    
         Phone:  613-591-9104 ;x 6417 
         Email:  avi@bridgewatersystems.com 
    
         Jouni Korhonen 
         Teliasonera Corporation 
          
         Phone: +358405344455 
         Email: jouni.korhonen@teliasonera.com 
    
   Intellectual Property Statement 
    
      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 athttp://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. 
    
    
   Disclaimer of Validity 
    
      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. 
    
    
   Copyright Statement 
  
   Adrangi, et al.        Expires February 27, 2005           [Page 8] 

    
   Internet Draft   RADIUS Chargeable User Identity      27 Sept 2004 
               
 
    
      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. 
    
    
   Acknowledgment 
    
      Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the 
      Internet Society. 
    








































  
   Adrangi, et al.        Expires February 27, 2005           [Page 9] 



PAFTECH AB 2003-20262026-04-22 13:10:05