Strong Identities for DOTS Agents
draft-moskowitz-dots-identities-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2016-10-30
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text xml 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)
DOTS                                                        R. Moskowitz
Internet-Draft                                                    L. Xia
Intended status: Standards Track                                  Huawei
Expires: May 3, 2017                                          D. Migault
                                                                Ericsson
                                                            A. Mortensen
                                                    Arbor Networks, Inc.
                                                        October 30, 2016

                   Strong Identities for DOTS Agents
                 draft-moskowitz-dots-identities-00.txt

Abstract

   DOTS communications are machine-to-machine oriented communications.
   In addition DOTS agents are expected to end up in a large number of
   entities.  As a result, in addition to secure, the naming scheme to
   identify all DOTS agents must be scalable.  For these reasons this
   document recommends the use of cryptographic identifiers or strong
   Identities as opposed to human readable identifiers for example.

   This document proposes two forms of strong Identities for the
   registration and operation of DOTS Agents.  One is 802.1AR LDevID
   [Std-802.1AR-2009] X.509 certificates.  The other is raw public keys
   as in HIP [RFC7401] or TLS/DTLS Raw Public Keys [RFC7250].

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 3, 2017.

Moskowitz, et al.          Expires May 3, 2017                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft               DOTS Identities                October 2016

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 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.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  X.509 LDevID  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.2.  Raw Public Key  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Terms and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.1.  Requirements Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.2.  Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Problem Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  Trusted Identities  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.2.  Managing the scope of Trust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Effectively Managing Identity Trust . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.1.  The IEEE 802.1AR Device Identity Certificate Model  . . .   5
     4.2.  The Raw Public Key Model  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   7.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8

1.  Introduction

   DOTS communications are machine-to-machine oriented communications.
   In addition DOTS agents are expected to end up in a large number of
   entities.  As a result, in addition to secure, the naming scheme to
   identify all DOTS agents must be scalable.  For these reasons the
   document recommend the use of cryptographic identifiers or strong
   Identities as opposed to human readable identifiers for example.

   Human readable identifiers are very helpful to represent a resource
Show full document text