Difference between revisions of "RFC6309"
imported>Admin (Created page with " Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) J. ArkkoRequest for Comments: 6309 A. KeranenObsoletes: 4909 ...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) J. Arkko | ||
| + | Request for Comments: 6309 A. Keranen | ||
| + | Obsoletes: 4909 J. Mattsson | ||
| + | Updates: 3830, 4563, 5410, 6043 Ericsson | ||
| + | Category: Standards Track August 2011 | ||
| + | ISSN: 2070-1721 | ||
| + | IANA Rules for MIKEY (Multimedia Internet KEYing) | ||
| − | + | '''Abstract''' | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | Abstract | ||
This document clarifies and relaxes the IANA rules for Multimedia | This document clarifies and relaxes the IANA rules for Multimedia | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
5410, and 6043; it obsoletes [[RFC4909|RFC 4909]]. | 5410, and 6043; it obsoletes [[RFC4909|RFC 4909]]. | ||
| − | Status of This Memo | + | '''Status of This Memo''' |
This is an Internet Standards Track document. | This is an Internet Standards Track document. | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6309. | http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6309. | ||
| − | Copyright Notice | + | '''Copyright Notice''' |
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | ||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | ||
described in the Simplified BSD License. | described in the Simplified BSD License. | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
== Introduction == | == Introduction == | ||
This document relaxes the IANA rules for Multimedia Internet KEYing | This document relaxes the IANA rules for Multimedia Internet KEYing | ||
| − | (MIKEY) [RFC3830]. The IANA rules defined in [RFC3830], [RFC4563], | + | (MIKEY) [[RFC3830]]. The IANA rules defined in [[RFC3830]], [[RFC4563]], |
| − | [RFC4909], and [RFC5410] are affected. In addition, the rules | + | [[RFC4909]], and [[RFC5410]] are affected. In addition, the rules |
| − | specified in [RFC6043] are re-specified here. | + | specified in [[RFC6043]] are re-specified here. |
Most of the values in MIKEY namespaces are divided into two ranges: | Most of the values in MIKEY namespaces are divided into two ranges: | ||
"IETF Review" (or "IETF Consensus" as it was previously called) and | "IETF Review" (or "IETF Consensus" as it was previously called) and | ||
| − | "Reserved for Private Use" [RFC5226]. This document changes, for | + | "Reserved for Private Use" [[RFC5226]]. This document changes, for |
majority of the namespaces, the requirement of "IETF Review" to "IETF | majority of the namespaces, the requirement of "IETF Review" to "IETF | ||
| − | Review or IESG Approval" [RFC5226]. For some namespaces, the | + | Review or IESG Approval" [[RFC5226]]. For some namespaces, the |
| − | requirement is changed to "Specification Required" [RFC5226]. | + | requirement is changed to "Specification Required" [[RFC5226]]. |
The rationale for this update is that there can be situations where | The rationale for this update is that there can be situations where | ||
| Line 69: | Line 61: | ||
that time has shown that the current requirement is unnecessarily | that time has shown that the current requirement is unnecessarily | ||
strict for some of the namespaces. By changing the current IANA | strict for some of the namespaces. By changing the current IANA | ||
| − | rules to also allow for "IESG Approval" [RFC5226], it becomes | + | rules to also allow for "IESG Approval" [[RFC5226]], it becomes |
possible for the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) to | possible for the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) to | ||
consider an allocation request, even if it does not fulfill the | consider an allocation request, even if it does not fulfill the | ||
| Line 87: | Line 79: | ||
defines the new IANA rules. Section 3 discusses the security | defines the new IANA rules. Section 3 discusses the security | ||
implications of this document. Sections 4, 5, 6, and 7 explain the | implications of this document. Sections 4, 5, 6, and 7 explain the | ||
| − | changes to [RFC3830], [RFC4563], [RFC4909], [RFC5410], and [RFC6043]. | + | changes to [[RFC3830]], [[RFC4563]], [[RFC4909]], [[RFC5410]], and [[RFC6043]]. |
== IANA Considerations == | == IANA Considerations == | ||
| Line 94: | Line 86: | ||
other MIKEY IANA registries remain unchanged. | other MIKEY IANA registries remain unchanged. | ||
| − | New values for the version field ([RFC3830], Section 6.1) and the C | + | New values for the version field ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.1) and the C |
| − | envelope key cache indicator ([RFC3830], Section 6.3) field can be | + | envelope key cache indicator ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.3) field can be |
allocated via "IETF Review". | allocated via "IETF Review". | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
The "IETF Review" requirement for adding new values into namespaces, | The "IETF Review" requirement for adding new values into namespaces, | ||
| − | originally defined in [RFC3830], is to be changed to "IETF Review or | + | originally defined in [[RFC3830]], is to be changed to "IETF Review or |
IESG Approval". This change affects the following namespaces: | IESG Approval". This change affects the following namespaces: | ||
| − | o data type ([ | + | o data type ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.1) |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | o | + | o Next payload ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.1) |
| − | o | + | o PRF func ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.1) |
| − | o | + | o CS ID map type ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.1) |
| − | o | + | o Encr alg ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.2) |
| − | o | + | o MAC alg ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.2) |
| − | o | + | o DH-Group ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.4) |
| − | o | + | o S type ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.5) |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| + | o TS type ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.6) | ||
| + | o ID Type ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.7) | ||
| + | o Cert Type ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.7) | ||
| + | o Hash func ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.8) | ||
| + | o SRTP Type ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.10) | ||
| + | o SRTP encr alg ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.10) | ||
| + | o SRTP auth alg ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.10) | ||
| + | o SRTP PRF ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.10) | ||
| + | o FEC order ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.10) | ||
| + | o Key Data Type ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.13) | ||
| + | o KV Type ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.13) | ||
The "IETF Review" requirement for the following registries, | The "IETF Review" requirement for the following registries, | ||
| − | originally defined in [RFC3830], [RFC4563], [RFC4909], and [RFC5410], | + | originally defined in [[RFC3830]], [[RFC4563]], [[RFC4909]], and [[RFC5410]], |
is to be changed to "Specification Required". | is to be changed to "Specification Required". | ||
| − | o Prot type ([RFC3830], Section 6.10) | + | o Prot type ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.10) |
| − | o Error no ([RFC3830], Section 6.12) | + | o Error no ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.12) |
| − | o General Extension Type ([RFC3830], Section 6.15) | + | o General Extension Type ([[RFC3830]], Section 6.15) |
| − | o KEY ID Type ([RFC4563], Section 4) | + | o KEY ID Type ([[RFC4563]], Section 4) |
| − | o OMA BCAST Data Subtype ([RFC5410], Section 3) | + | o OMA BCAST Data Subtype ([[RFC5410]], Section 3) |
The "Specification Required" requirement remains for the following | The "Specification Required" requirement remains for the following | ||
namespaces: | namespaces: | ||
| − | o TS Role ([RFC6043], Section 6.4) | + | o TS Role ([[RFC6043]], Section 6.4) |
| − | o ID Role ([RFC6043], Section 6.6) | + | o ID Role ([[RFC6043]], Section 6.6) |
| − | o RAND Role ([RFC6043], Section 6.8) | + | o RAND Role ([[RFC6043]], Section 6.8) |
| − | o Ticket Type ([RFC6043], Section 6.10) | + | o Ticket Type ([[RFC6043]], Section 6.10) |
The range of valid values for certain namespaces defined in the IANA | The range of valid values for certain namespaces defined in the IANA | ||
| − | considerations of [RFC3830] was not explicitly defined and is | + | considerations of [[RFC3830]] was not explicitly defined and is |
clarified here as follows: | clarified here as follows: | ||
| Line 202: | Line 177: | ||
the new values are still addressed. | the new values are still addressed. | ||
| + | == Changes from [[RFC3830|RFC 3830]] == | ||
| − | + | Section 2 relaxes the requirements from those defined in [[RFC3830]]. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | Section 2 relaxes the requirements from those defined in [RFC3830]. | ||
A number of namespaces now have the "IETF Review or IESG Approval" | A number of namespaces now have the "IETF Review or IESG Approval" | ||
requirement, when they previously had the "IETF Review" requirement. | requirement, when they previously had the "IETF Review" requirement. | ||
| Line 218: | Line 185: | ||
requirement. | requirement. | ||
| − | == Changes from RFC 4563 == | + | == Changes from [[RFC4563|RFC 4563]] == |
| − | Section 2 relaxes the requirements from those defined in [RFC4563]. | + | Section 2 relaxes the requirements from those defined in [[RFC4563]]. |
The KEY ID Type namespace now has the "Specification Required" | The KEY ID Type namespace now has the "Specification Required" | ||
requirement. | requirement. | ||
| − | == Changes from RFC 4909 and RFC 5410 == | + | == Changes from [[RFC4909|RFC 4909]] and [[RFC5410|RFC 5410]] == |
| − | Section 2 relaxes the requirements from those defined in [RFC4909]. | + | Section 2 relaxes the requirements from those defined in [[RFC4909]]. |
The OMA BCAST Data Subtype namespace now has the "Specification | The OMA BCAST Data Subtype namespace now has the "Specification | ||
| − | Required" requirement. Note that [RFC5410] obsoleted [RFC4909] but | + | Required" requirement. Note that [[RFC5410]] obsoleted [[RFC4909]] but |
does not actually define the IANA rules itself. As a result, from | does not actually define the IANA rules itself. As a result, from | ||
now on, this RFC defines the IANA requirements for the OMA BCAST Data | now on, this RFC defines the IANA requirements for the OMA BCAST Data | ||
Subtype namespace. | Subtype namespace. | ||
| − | == Changes from RFC 6043 == | + | == Changes from [[RFC6043|RFC 6043]] == |
| − | There are no changes to the rules specified in [RFC6043]. However, | + | There are no changes to the rules specified in [[RFC6043]]. However, |
for sake of completeness, Section 2 re-specifies these rules in this | for sake of completeness, Section 2 re-specifies these rules in this | ||
document, and from now on, this RFC defines the IANA requirements for | document, and from now on, this RFC defines the IANA requirements for | ||
| Line 244: | Line 211: | ||
=== Normative References === | === Normative References === | ||
| − | [RFC3830] Arkko, J., Carrara, E., Lindholm, F., Naslund, M., and K. | + | [[RFC3830]] Arkko, J., Carrara, E., Lindholm, F., Naslund, M., and K. |
| − | + | Norrman, "MIKEY: Multimedia Internet KEYing", [[RFC3830|RFC 3830]], | |
| − | + | August 2004. | |
| − | |||
| + | [[RFC4563]] Carrara, E., Lehtovirta, V., and K. Norrman, "The Key ID | ||
| + | Information Type for the General Extension Payload in | ||
| + | Multimedia Internet KEYing (MIKEY)", [[RFC4563|RFC 4563]], June 2006. | ||
| + | [[RFC5226]] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an | ||
| + | IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", [[BCP26|BCP 26]], [[RFC5226|RFC 5226]], | ||
| + | May 2008. | ||
| + | [[RFC5410]] Jerichow, A. and L. Piron, "Multimedia Internet KEYing | ||
| + | (MIKEY) General Extension Payload for Open Mobile Alliance | ||
| + | BCAST 1.0", [[RFC5410|RFC 5410]], January 2009. | ||
| + | [[RFC6043]] Mattsson, J. and T. Tian, "MIKEY-TICKET: Ticket-Based | ||
| + | Modes of Key Distribution in Multimedia Internet KEYing | ||
| + | (MIKEY)", [[RFC6043|RFC 6043]], March 2011. | ||
| + | === Informative References === | ||
| − | [ | + | [[RFC4909]] Dondeti, L., Castleford, D., and F. Hartung, "Multimedia |
| − | + | Internet KEYing (MIKEY) General Extension Payload for Open | |
| − | + | Mobile Alliance BCAST LTKM/STKM Transport", [[RFC4909|RFC 4909]], | |
| + | June 2007. | ||
| − | |||
Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | ||
| Line 267: | Line 246: | ||
EMail: [email protected] | EMail: [email protected] | ||
| − | |||
Ari Keranen | Ari Keranen | ||
| Line 275: | Line 253: | ||
EMail: [email protected] | EMail: [email protected] | ||
| − | |||
John Mattsson | John Mattsson | ||
| Line 283: | Line 260: | ||
EMail: [email protected] | EMail: [email protected] | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
[[Category:Standards Track]] | [[Category:Standards Track]] | ||
Latest revision as of 09:22, 1 October 2020
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) J. Arkko Request for Comments: 6309 A. Keranen Obsoletes: 4909 J. Mattsson Updates: 3830, 4563, 5410, 6043 Ericsson Category: Standards Track August 2011 ISSN: 2070-1721
IANA Rules for MIKEY (Multimedia Internet KEYing)
Abstract
This document clarifies and relaxes the IANA rules for Multimedia Internet KEYing (MIKEY). This document updates RFCs 3830, 4563, 5410, and 6043; it obsoletes RFC 4909.
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6309.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 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.
Contents
Introduction
This document relaxes the IANA rules for Multimedia Internet KEYing (MIKEY) RFC3830. The IANA rules defined in RFC3830, RFC4563, RFC4909, and RFC5410 are affected. In addition, the rules specified in RFC6043 are re-specified here.
Most of the values in MIKEY namespaces are divided into two ranges: "IETF Review" (or "IETF Consensus" as it was previously called) and "Reserved for Private Use" RFC5226. This document changes, for majority of the namespaces, the requirement of "IETF Review" to "IETF Review or IESG Approval" RFC5226. For some namespaces, the requirement is changed to "Specification Required" RFC5226.
The rationale for this update is that there can be situations where it makes sense to grant an allocation under special circumstances or that time has shown that the current requirement is unnecessarily strict for some of the namespaces. By changing the current IANA rules to also allow for "IESG Approval" RFC5226, it becomes possible for the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) to consider an allocation request, even if it does not fulfill the default rule. For instance, an experimental protocol extension could perhaps deserve a new payload type as long as a sufficient number of types still remains, and the MIKEY community is happy with such an allocation. Moreover, for some registries, a stable specification would be a sufficient requirement, and this is thus reflected in the updated IANA rules. For instance, an RFC via the Independent Stream at the RFC Editor is sufficient for some registries and does not force an IETF evaluation of a particular new extension for which there is no general demand. Nevertheless, "IETF Review" is still encouraged (instead of using the "IESG Approval" path) if there is doubt about whether or not it is needed for a new allocation.
The rest of this document is structured as follows. Section 2 defines the new IANA rules. Section 3 discusses the security implications of this document. Sections 4, 5, 6, and 7 explain the changes to RFC3830, RFC4563, RFC4909, RFC5410, and RFC6043.
IANA Considerations
IANA updated the registries related to MIKEY as specified below. All other MIKEY IANA registries remain unchanged.
New values for the version field (RFC3830, Section 6.1) and the C envelope key cache indicator (RFC3830, Section 6.3) field can be allocated via "IETF Review".
The "IETF Review" requirement for adding new values into namespaces, originally defined in RFC3830, is to be changed to "IETF Review or IESG Approval". This change affects the following namespaces:
o data type (RFC3830, Section 6.1)
o Next payload (RFC3830, Section 6.1)
o PRF func (RFC3830, Section 6.1)
o CS ID map type (RFC3830, Section 6.1)
o Encr alg (RFC3830, Section 6.2)
o MAC alg (RFC3830, Section 6.2)
o DH-Group (RFC3830, Section 6.4)
o S type (RFC3830, Section 6.5)
o TS type (RFC3830, Section 6.6)
o ID Type (RFC3830, Section 6.7)
o Cert Type (RFC3830, Section 6.7)
o Hash func (RFC3830, Section 6.8)
o SRTP Type (RFC3830, Section 6.10)
o SRTP encr alg (RFC3830, Section 6.10)
o SRTP auth alg (RFC3830, Section 6.10)
o SRTP PRF (RFC3830, Section 6.10)
o FEC order (RFC3830, Section 6.10)
o Key Data Type (RFC3830, Section 6.13)
o KV Type (RFC3830, Section 6.13)
The "IETF Review" requirement for the following registries, originally defined in RFC3830, RFC4563, RFC4909, and RFC5410, is to be changed to "Specification Required".
o Prot type (RFC3830, Section 6.10)
o Error no (RFC3830, Section 6.12)
o General Extension Type (RFC3830, Section 6.15)
o KEY ID Type (RFC4563, Section 4)
o OMA BCAST Data Subtype (RFC5410, Section 3)
The "Specification Required" requirement remains for the following namespaces:
o TS Role (RFC6043, Section 6.4)
o ID Role (RFC6043, Section 6.6)
o RAND Role (RFC6043, Section 6.8)
o Ticket Type (RFC6043, Section 6.10)
The range of valid values for certain namespaces defined in the IANA considerations of RFC3830 was not explicitly defined and is clarified here as follows:
+--------------------------------+--------------+
| Namespace | Valid values |
+--------------------------------+--------------+
| C Envelope Key Cache Indicator | 0 - 3 |
| S type | 0 - 15 |
| Key Data Type | 0 - 15 |
| KV Type | 0 - 15 |
+--------------------------------+--------------+
Security Considerations
This specification does not change the security properties of MIKEY. However, when new values are introduced without IETF consensus, care needs to be taken to assure that possible security concerns regarding the new values are still addressed.
Changes from RFC 3830
Section 2 relaxes the requirements from those defined in RFC3830. A number of namespaces now have the "IETF Review or IESG Approval" requirement, when they previously had the "IETF Review" requirement. In addition, some namespaces now have the "Specification Required" requirement.
Changes from RFC 4563
Section 2 relaxes the requirements from those defined in RFC4563. The KEY ID Type namespace now has the "Specification Required" requirement.
Changes from RFC 4909 and RFC 5410
Section 2 relaxes the requirements from those defined in RFC4909. The OMA BCAST Data Subtype namespace now has the "Specification Required" requirement. Note that RFC5410 obsoleted RFC4909 but does not actually define the IANA rules itself. As a result, from now on, this RFC defines the IANA requirements for the OMA BCAST Data Subtype namespace.
Changes from RFC 6043
There are no changes to the rules specified in RFC6043. However, for sake of completeness, Section 2 re-specifies these rules in this document, and from now on, this RFC defines the IANA requirements for those namespaces.
References
Normative References
RFC3830 Arkko, J., Carrara, E., Lindholm, F., Naslund, M., and K.
Norrman, "MIKEY: Multimedia Internet KEYing", RFC 3830, August 2004.
RFC4563 Carrara, E., Lehtovirta, V., and K. Norrman, "The Key ID
Information Type for the General Extension Payload in
Multimedia Internet KEYing (MIKEY)", RFC 4563, June 2006.
RFC5226 Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, May 2008.
RFC5410 Jerichow, A. and L. Piron, "Multimedia Internet KEYing
(MIKEY) General Extension Payload for Open Mobile Alliance
BCAST 1.0", RFC 5410, January 2009.
RFC6043 Mattsson, J. and T. Tian, "MIKEY-TICKET: Ticket-Based
Modes of Key Distribution in Multimedia Internet KEYing
(MIKEY)", RFC 6043, March 2011.
Informative References
RFC4909 Dondeti, L., Castleford, D., and F. Hartung, "Multimedia
Internet KEYing (MIKEY) General Extension Payload for Open
Mobile Alliance BCAST LTKM/STKM Transport", RFC 4909,
June 2007.
Authors' Addresses
Jari Arkko Ericsson Jorvas 02420 Finland
EMail: [email protected]
Ari Keranen Ericsson Jorvas 02420 Finland
EMail: [email protected]
John Mattsson Ericsson Stockholm SE-164 80 Sweden
EMail: [email protected]
