RFC6309
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]
