Diet-ESP: a flexible and compressed format for IPsec/ESP
draft-mglt-ipsecme-diet-esp-00

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2014-03-03
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
IPSECME                                                  D. Migault (Ed)
Internet-Draft                                                    Orange
Intended status: Standards Track                             T. Guggemos
Expires: September 4, 2014                           Orange / LMU Munich
                                                            D. Palomares
                                                    Orange / LIP6 - UMPC
                                                           March 3, 2014

        Diet-ESP: a flexible and compressed format for IPsec/ESP
                   draft-mglt-ipsecme-diet-esp-00.txt

Abstract

   IPsec/ESP has been designed to secure IP packets exchanged between
   two nodes.  IPsec implements security at the IP layer which makes
   security transparent to the applications, as opposed to TLS or DTLS
   that requires application to implement TLS/DTLS.  As a result, IPsec
   enable to define the security rules in a similar way one establishes
   firewall rules.

   One of the IPsec's drawbacks is that implementing security on a per
   packet basis adds overhead to each IP packet.  Considering IoT
   devices, the data transmitted over an IP packet is expected to be
   rather small, and the cost of sending extra bytes is so high that
   IPsec/ESP can hardly be used for IoT as it is currently defined in
   RFC 4303.

   This document defines Diet-ESP, a protocol that compress and reduce
   the ESP overhead of IPsec/ESP so that it can fit security and energy
   efficient IoT requirements.  Diet-ESP use already existing mechanism
   like IKEv2 to negotiate the compression format.  Furthermore a lot of
   information, already existing for an IPsec Security Association, are
   reused to offer light negotiation in addition to maximum compression.

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

Migault (Ed), et al.    Expires September 4, 2014               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                  Diet-ESP                      March 2014

   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 September 4, 2014.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 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.

Table of Contents

   1.  Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Diet-ESP: Protocol Description  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Diet-ESP Context: Format Description  . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  Difference between Diet-ESP and ESP . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     6.1.  Packet Alignment  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     6.2.  SAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       6.2.1.  Storing SPI SIZE SPI in the SAD . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       6.2.2.  Inbound Security Association Lookup . . . . . . . . .  12
       6.2.3.  Outgoing Security Association Lookup  . . . . . . . .  16
     6.3.  Sequence Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     6.4.  Outgoing Packet processing  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     6.5.  Inbound Packet processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   9.  NAT Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   10. Acknowledgment  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
   11. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     11.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     11.2.  Informational References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   Appendix A.  Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
Show full document text