One document matched: draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-02.txt

Differences from draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-01.txt


Network Working Group                                     Sheng Jiang 
Internet Draft                                        Sam(Zhongqi) Xia 
Intended status: Standards Track          Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd 
Expires: May 30, 2011                                November 19, 2010 
                                    
  Configuring Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGA) using DHCPv6 
                draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-02.txt 


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 May 30, 2011. 

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 
   described in the Simplified BSD License. 









 
 
 
Jiang & Xia             Expires May 30, 2011                  [Page 1] 

Internet-Draft draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-02.txt   November 2010 
    

 

Abstract 

   A Cryptographically Generated Address is an IPv6 addresses binding 
   with a public/private key pair. However, the current CGA 
   specifications are lack of procedures to enable proper management of 
   the usage of CGAs. This document defines the process using DHCPv6 to 
   manage CGAs in detail. A new DHCPv6 option is defined accordingly. 
   This document also analyses the configuration of the parameters, 
   which are used to generate CGAs, using DHCPv6. Although the document 
   does not define new DHCPv6 option to carry these parameters for 
   various reasons, the configuration procedure is described. 

Table of Contents 

   1. Introduction................................................3 
   2. Terminology.................................................3 
   3. CGA Configure Process Using DHCPv6...........................3 
      3.1. Configuration of the parameters required for the generation 
      of CGA......................................................4 
      3.2. Host requests CGA Approved to the DHCPv6 server..........5 
   4. CGA Grant Option............................................7 
   5. Security Considerations......................................7 
   6. IANA Considerations.........................................8 
   7. Acknowledgments.............................................8 
   8. References..................................................8 
      8.1. Normative References....................................8 
      8.2. Informative References..................................9 
   Author's Addresses............................................10 
    















 
 
Jiang & Xia             Expires May 30, 2011                  [Page 2] 

Internet-Draft draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-02.txt   November 2010 
    

    

1. Introduction 

   Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGA, [RFC3972]) provide means 
   to verify the ownership of IPv6 addresses without requiring any 
   security infrastructure such as a certification authority. 

   CGAs were originally designed for SeND [RFC3971] and SeND is 
   generally not used in the same environment as a Dynamic Host 
   Configure Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) [RFC3315] server. However, after 
   CGA has been defined, as an independent security property, many other 
   CGA usages have been proposed and defined, such as Site Multihoming 
   by IPv6 Intermediation (SHIM6) [RFC5533], Enhanced Route Optimization 
   for Mobile IPv6 [RFC4866], also using the CGA for DHCP security 
   purpose [I-D.ietf-dhc-secure-dhcpv6], etc. The use of CGAs allows 
   identity verification in different protocols. In these scenarios, 
   CGAs may be used in DHCPv6-managed networks. 

   As [I-D.ietf-csi-dhcpv6-cga-ps] analyses, in the current 
   specifications, there is a lack of procedures to enable proper 
   management of the usage of CGAs. Particularly, in a DHCPv6-managed 
   network, a new DHCPv6 option is missed, therefore, the DHCPv6 server 
   can NOT grant the use of host-generated CGA addresses on request from 
   the client, or reject the CGA on the basis of a too-low sec value. In 
   order to fill this gap, a new DHCPv6 option, CGA Grant Option, is 
   defined in this document. 

   This document also analyses the configuration of the parameters, 
   which are used to generate CGAs, using DHCPv6. Although the document 
   does not define new DHCPv6 option to carry these parameters for 
   various reasons, the configuration procedure is described. The 
   procedure works with existing options or future define options. 

2. Terminology 

   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 [RFC2119]. 

3. CGA Configure Process Using DHCPv6 

   The CGA specifications [RFC3972] define the procedure to generate a 
   CGA. However, it assumes that hosts decide by itself or have been 
   preconfigured all CGA relevant parameters. In reality, the network 
   management MAY want to assign/enforcement some parameters to hosts; 
   the network management MAY also manage the use of CGAs. 
 
 
Jiang & Xia             Expires May 30, 2011                  [Page 3] 

Internet-Draft draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-02.txt   November 2010 
    

   Among the mechanisms in which configuration parameters could be 
   pushed to the end hosts and/or CGA related information sent back to a 
   central administration, we discuss the stateful configuration 
   mechanism based on DCHPv6 in this document. Other mechanisms may also 
   provide similar functions, but out of scope. 

   In this section, configuration CGA parameters and that a DHCPv6 
   server grants the CGA usage are described in details. 

3.1. Configuration of the parameters required for the generation of CGA 

   Each CGA is associated with a CGA Parameters data structure, which is 
   formed by all input parameters [RFC3972] except for Sec value that is 
   embedded in the CGA. The CGA associated Parameters used to generate a 
   CGA includes: 

     - a Public Key, 

     - a Subnet Prefix, 

     - a 3-bit security parameter, Sec. Additionally, it should be noted 
     that the hash algorithm to be used in the generation of the CGA is 
     also defined by the Sec value [RFC4982], 

     - any Extension Fields that could be used. 

     - Note: the modifier and the Collision Count value in the CGA 
     Parameter data structure are generated during the CGA generation 
     process. They do NOT need to be configured. 

   In a DHCPv6 managed network, a host may initiate a request for the 
   relevant CGA configuration information needed to the DHCPv6 server. 
   The server responds with the configuration information for the host. 
   The Option Request Option, defined in Section 22.7 in [RFC3315], can 
   be used for host to indicate which options the client requests from 
   the server. For response, the requested Option should be included. 
   The server MAY also initiatively push these parameters by attaching 
   these option in the response messages which are initiated for other 
   purposes. 

     - The Public/Private key pair is generated by hosts themselves and 
     considered not suitable for network transmission for security 
     reasons. The configuration of the client key pair or certificate is 
     out of scope. 

     - Currently, there are convenient mechanisms for allowing an 
     administrator to configure the subnet prefix for a host, by Router 
 
 
Jiang & Xia             Expires May 30, 2011                  [Page 4] 

Internet-Draft draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-02.txt   November 2010 
    

     Advertisement [RFC4861, RFC4862]. However, this does not suitable 
     for the DHCP-managed network. To propagate the prefix through DHCP 
     interactions, DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation Option [RFC3633] MAY be  
     used. However, this option was designed to assign prefix block for 
     routers. A new Prefix Assignment Option MAY need to be defined. 
     Since alternative approach is existing and there are debates 
     whether a new Prefix Assignment Option MAY is necessary, this 
     document does not define it. 

     - Although the network management MAY want to enforce or configure 
     a Sec value to the hosts, it is considered as a very dangerous 
     action. A malicious fake server may send out a high Sec value to 
     attack clients giving the fact that generation a CGA with a high 
     Sec value is very computational intensive [I-D.ietf-csi-dhcpv6-cga-
     ps]. Another risk is that a malicious server could propagate a Sec 
     value providing less protection than intended by the network 
     administrator, facilitating a brute force attack against the hash, 
     or the selection of the weakest hash algorithm available for CGA 
     definition. A recommendation Sec value is considered as confusion 
     information. The receiving host is lack for information to make 
     choose whether generates a CGA according to the recommendation or 
     not. Therefore, the document does not define a DHCPv6 option to 
     propagate the Sec value. 

     - Although there is an optional Extension Fields in CGA Parameter 
     data structure, there is NO any defined extension fields. If in the 
     future, new Extension Fields in CGA Parameter data structure are 
     defined, future specification may define correspondent DHCPv6 
     options to carry these parameters. 

   Upon reception of the CGA relevant parameters from DHCPv6 server, the 
   end hosts SHOULD generate addresses compliant with the received 
   parameters. If the parameters change, the end hosts SHOULD generate 
   new addresses compliant with the parameters propagated. 

3.2. Host requests CGA Approved to the DHCPv6 server 

   A CGA address is generated by the associated key pair owner, normally 
   an end host. However, in a DHCPv6-managed network, hosts should use 
   IPv6 global addresses only from a DHCPv6 server. The process 
   described below allows a host, also DHCPv6 client, uses self-
   generated CGAs in a DHCPv6-managed environment, by requesting the 
   granting from a DHCPv6 server. 

   The client sends a CGA, which is generated by itself, to a DHCPv6 
   server, and requests the DHCP server to determine whether the 
   generated CGA satisfies the requirements of the network  
 
 
Jiang & Xia             Expires May 30, 2011                  [Page 5] 

Internet-Draft draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-02.txt   November 2010 
    

   configuration, wherein the network configuration comprises a CGA 
   security level set by the DHCP; and generates a new CGA if the 
   generated CGA does not satisfy the requirements of the network 
   configuration. 

   Client initiation behavior 

   In details, a DHCPv6 client SHOULD send a DHCPv6 Request message to 
   initiate the CGA granting process. 

   This DHCPv6 Request message MUST include an Option Request option, 
   which requests the CGA Grant Option, defined in Section 4 in this 
   document, to indicate the DHCPv6 server responses with the address 
   granting decision. The CGA_Grant field in the embedded CGA Grant 
   Option should be set all 1 (FFx). 

   The client MUST include one or more IA Options, either IA_NA or IA 
   _TA, in the Request message. Each IA Option MUST include one or more 
   IA Address Options. CGAs are carried in the IA Address Options. 

   Server behavior 

   Upon reception of the Request message, the DHCPv6 server SHOULD 
   verify whether the client's CGAs satisfy the CGA-related 
   configuration parameters of the network. The DHCPv6 server SHOULD NOT 
   handle the Request which the CGA Grant field is not all 1(FFx). The 
   DHCPv6 server then send an acknowledgement, a Reply message, to the 
   client to either grant the use of the CGA or decline the requested 
   CGA. The CGA_Grant field SHOULD be set following the rule, defined in 
   Section 4 in this document. When the requested CGA is declined, the 
   DHCPv6 server MAY also recommend a Sec value to the client a using 
   the CGA Grant option. 

   In the meantime, the DHCPv6 server MAY log the requested CGA 
   addresses. This information MAY later be used by other network 
   functions, such as ACL. 

   Client receiving behavior 

   Upon reception of the acknowledgement from server, the client can 
   legally use the granted CGAs. The client SHOULD silently drop any 
   message that has the CGA Grant field set any other value, but F0x, 
   00x~07x. If the server declines the requested CGA, the client MUST 
   generate a new CGA. If the server replies with CGA-relevant 
   parameters, the client MAY generate a new CGA accordingly. 


 
 
Jiang & Xia             Expires May 30, 2011                  [Page 6] 

Internet-Draft draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-02.txt   November 2010 
    

4. CGA Grant Option 

   DHCPv6 CGA Grant Option is used to indicate the DHCPv6 client whether 
   the requested address is granted or not. In the decline case, a 
   recommended Sec value MAY be sent, too. 

    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 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   |       OPTION_ADDR_GRANT       |       option-len              | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   |   CGA Grant   | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 

       option-code 

         OPTION_ADDR_GRANT (TBA1). 

       option-len 

         1. 

       CGA Grant 

         The CGA_Grant field sets all 1 (FFx) when a client requests 
         granting from server. It sets F0x to indicate that the 
         requested CGA is granted; it sets 00x to indicate that the 
         requested Address is declined without any recommended Sec  
         value. It sets 01x~07x to indicate that requested Address is 
         declined and the recommended Sec value (value from 1~7). 

   Note: On receiving the CGA Grant Option with reject information and 
   recommended Sec value, the client MAY generate a new CGA with the 
   recommended Sec value. If choosing not use the recommended Sec  
   value, the client MAY take the risk that it is not able to use full 
   network capabilities. 

5. Security Considerations 

   The mechanisms based on DHCPv6 are all vulnerable to attacks to the 
   DHCP client. Proper use of DHCPv6 autoconfiguration facilities 
   [RFC3315], such as AUTH option or Secure DHCP [I-D.ietf-dhc-secure-
   dhcpv6] can prevent these threats, provided that a configuration 
   token is known to both the client and the server. 

   Note that, as expected, it is not possible to provide secure 
   configuration of CGA without a previous configuration of security 
 
 
Jiang & Xia             Expires May 30, 2011                  [Page 7] 

Internet-Draft draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-02.txt   November 2010 
    

   information at the client (either a trust anchor, a DHCPv6 
   configuration token...). However, considering that the values of 
   these elements could be shared by the hosts in the network segment, 
   these security elements can be configured more easily in the end 
   hosts than its addresses. 

6. IANA Considerations 

   This document defines two new DHCPv6 [RFC3315] options, which must be 
   assigned Option Type values within the option numbering space for 
   DHCPv6 messages: 

   The DHCPv6 CGA Grant Option (TBA1), described in Section 4. 

7. Acknowledgments 

   The authors would like to thank Marcelo Bagnulo Braun and Alberto 
   Garcia-Martinez from Universidad Carlos III de Madrid for been 
   involved in the early requirement identification. Valuable comments 
   from Bernie Volz, Ted Lemon, John Jason Brzozowski and Dujuan Gu, 
   Huawei are appreciated. 

8. Change Log [RFC Editor please remove] 

   draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-02, remove Sec option according to 
   IETF 79 discussion, 2010-11-19. 

   draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-01, remove CGA generation 
   delegation according to IETF 77 and mail list discussion, 2010-08-24. 

   draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-00, original version, 2010-02-03. 

9. References 

9.1. Normative References 

   [RFC2119] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 
             Requirement Levels", RFC2119, March 1997. 

   [RFC3315] R. Droms, Ed., "Dynamic Host Configure Protocol for IPv6", 
             RFC3315, July 2003. 

   [RFC3633] O. Troan and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic 
             Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6", RFC 3633, 
             December 2003. 


 
 
Jiang & Xia             Expires May 30, 2011                  [Page 8] 

Internet-Draft draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-02.txt   November 2010 
    

   [RFC3971] J. Arkko, J. Kempf, B. Zill and P. Nikander, "SEcure 
             Neighbor Discovery (SEND) ", RFC 3971, March 2005. 

   [RFC3972] T. Aura, "Cryptographically Generated Address", RFC3972, 
             March 2005. 

   [RFC4861] T. Narten, et al., "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 
             (IPv6)", RFC 4861, September 2007. 

   [RFC4862] S. Thomson, T. Narten and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless 
             Address Autoconfiguration", RFC4862, September 2007. 

   [RFC4866] J. Arkko, C. Vogt and W. Haddad, "Enhanced Route 
             Optimization for Mobile IPv6", RFC4866, May 2007. 

   [RFC4982] M. Bagnulo, "Support for Multiple Hash Algorithms in 
             Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGAs) ", RFC4982, 
             July 2007. 

   [RFC5533] E. Nordmark and M. Bagnulo, "Shim6: Level 3 Multihoming 
             Shim Protocol for IPv6" FRC 5533, June 2009. 

9.2. Informative References 

   [I-D.ietf-csi-dhcpv6-cga-ps] 
             S. Jiang, S. Shen and T. Chown, "DHCPv6 and CGA  
             Interaction: Problem Statement", draft-ietf-csi-dhcpv6-cga-
             ps (work in progress), October, 2010. 

   [I-D.ietf-dhc-secure-dhcpv6] 
             S. Jiang and S. Shen, "Secure DHCPv6 Using CGAs", draft-
             ietf-dhc-secure-dhcpv6 (work in progress), June 2010. 














 
 
Jiang & Xia             Expires May 30, 2011                  [Page 9] 

Internet-Draft draft-jiang-dhc-cga-config-dhcpv6-02.txt   November 2010 
    

Author's Addresses 

   Sheng Jiang 
   Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd 
   Huawei Building, No.3 Xinxi Rd., 
   Shang-Di Information Industry Base, Hai-Dian District, Beijing 100085 
   P.R. China 
   Email: shengjiang@huawei.com 
    

   Sam(Zhongqi) Xia 
   Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd 
   Huawei Building, No.3 Xinxi Rd., 
   Shang-Di Information Industry Base, Hai-Dian District, Beijing 100085 
   P.R. China 
   Email: xiazhongqi@huawei.com 






























 
 
Jiang & Xia             Expires May 30, 2011                 [Page 10] 


PAFTECH AB 2003-20262026-04-22 23:37:34