Communicating Proxy Configurations in Provisioning Domains
draft-pauly-intarea-proxy-config-pvd-01
This document is an Internet-Draft (I-D).
Anyone may submit an I-D to the IETF.
This I-D is not endorsed by the IETF and has no formal standing in the
IETF standards process.
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Replaced".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Tommy Pauly , Dragana Damjanovic | ||
| Last updated | 2023-10-13 (Latest revision 2023-06-27) | ||
| Replaced by | draft-ietf-intarea-proxy-config | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-pauly-intarea-proxy-config-pvd-01
Network Working Group T. Pauly
Internet-Draft Apple, Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track D. Damjanovic
Expires: 15 April 2024 Microsoft
13 October 2023
Communicating Proxy Configurations in Provisioning Domains
draft-pauly-intarea-proxy-config-pvd-01
Abstract
This document defines a mechanism for accessing provisioning domain
information associated with a proxy, such as other proxy URIs that
support different protocols and a list of DNS zones that are
accessible via a proxy.
Discussion Venues
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
https://github.com/tfpauly/privacy-proxy.
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 https://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 15 April 2024.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Pauly & Damjanovic Expires 15 April 2024 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Proxy Configuration PvDs October 2023
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://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 Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Fetching PvD Additional Information for proxies . . . . . . . 4
3. Enumerating proxies within a PvD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Split DNS information for proxies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Discovering proxies from network PvDs . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Introduction
HTTP proxies that use the CONNECT method Section 9.3.6 of [HTTP]
(often referred to as "forward" proxies) allow clients to open
connections to hosts via a proxy. These typically allow for TCP
stream proxying, but can also support UDP proxying [CONNECTUDP] and
IP packet proxying [CONNECTIP]. Such proxies are not just defined as
hostnames and ports, but can use URI templates [URITEMPLATE].
In order to make use of multiple related proxies, clients need a way
to understand which proxies are associated with one another.
Client can also benefit from learning about additional information
associated with the proxy to optimize their proxy usage, such knowing
that a proxy is configured to only allow access to a limited set of
next hops.
These improvements to client behavior can be achieved through the use
of Provisioning Domains. Provisioning Domains (PvDs) are defined in
[PVD] as consistent sets of network configuration information, which
can include proxy configuration details Section 2 of [PVD].
Pauly & Damjanovic Expires 15 April 2024 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Proxy Configuration PvDs October 2023
[PVDDATA] defines a JSON [JSON] format for describing Provisioning
Domain Additional Information, which is an extensible dictionary of
properties of the Provisioning Domain.
This document defines several mechanisms to use PvDs to help clients
understand how to use proxies:
1. A way to fetch PvD Additional Information associated with a known
proxy URI (Section 2)
2. A way to list one or more proxy URIs in a PvD, allowing clients
to learn about other proxy options given a known proxy
(Section 3).
3. A way to define a limited set of DNS zones that are accessible
through the proxy (Section 4).
Additionally, this document partly describes how these mechanisms
might be used to discover proxies associated with a network
(Section 5).
1.1. Background
Other non-standard mechanisms for proxy configuration and discovery
have been used historically, some of which are described in
[RFC3040].
Proxy Auto Configuration (PAC) files Section 6.2 of [RFC3040] are
Javascript scripts that take URLs as input and provide an output of a
proxy configuration to use.
Web Proxy Auto-Discovery Protocol (WPAD) Section 6.4 of [RFC3040]
allows networks to advertise proxies to use by advertising a PAC
file. This solution squats on DHCP option 252.
These common (but non-standard) mechanisms only support defining
proxies by hostname and port, and do not support configuring a full
URI template [URITEMPLATE].
The mechanisms defined in this document are intended to offer a
standard alternative that works for URI-based proxies and avoids
dependencies on executing Javascript scripts, which can open up
security vulnerabilities.
Pauly & Damjanovic Expires 15 April 2024 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Proxy Configuration PvDs October 2023
1.2. Requirements
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
2. Fetching PvD Additional Information for proxies
This document defines a way to fetch PvD Additional Information
associated with a proxy. This PvD describes the properties of the
network accessible through the proxy.
In order to fetch PvD Additional Information associated with a proxy,
a client issues an HTTP GET request for the well-known PvD URI
(".well-known/pvd") [PVDDATA] and the host authority of the proxy.
This is applicable for both proxies that are identified by a host and
port only (such as SOCKS proxies and HTTP CONNECT proxies) and
proxies that are identified by a URL.
For example, a client would issue the following request for the PvD
associated with "https://proxy.example.org/
masque{?target_host,target_port}":
:method = GET
:scheme = https
:authority = proxy.example.org
:path = /.well-known/pvd
accept = application/pvd+json
For a HTTP CONNECT proxy on "proxy.example.org:8080", the client
would send the following request:
:method = GET
:scheme = https
:authority = proxy.example.org:8080
:path = /.well-known/pvd
accept = application/pvd+json
Note that all proxies that are colocated on the same host and port
share the same PvD Additional Information. Proxy deployments that
need separate PvD configuration properties SHOULD use different
hosts.
Pauly & Damjanovic Expires 15 April 2024 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Proxy Configuration PvDs October 2023
PvD Additional Information is required to contain the "identifier",
"expires", and "prefixes" keys. For proxy PvDs as defined in this
document, the "identifier" MUST match the hostname of the HTTP proxy.
The "prefixes" array SHOULD be empty by default.
3. Enumerating proxies within a PvD
This document defines a new PvD Additional Information key, proxies,
that is an array of strings that is a list of proxy URIs (or URI
templates [URITEMPLATE]) that are available as part of a PvD. The
new key is registered in Section 7.
The kind of proxy is implied by the URI scheme and any template
variables. For example, since UDP proxying [CONNECTUDP] has the URI
template variables target_host and target_port, the URI
"https://proxy.example.org:4443/masque{?target_host,target_port}"
implies that the proxy supports UDP proxying.
When a PvD that contains the proxies key is fetched from a known
proxy using the method described in Section 2 the proxies list
describes equivalent proxies (potentially supporting other protocols)
that can be used in addition to the known proxy.
Such cases are useful for informing clients of related proxies as a
discovery method, with the assumption that the client already is
aware of one proxy. Many historical methods of configuring a proxy
only allow configuring a single FQDN hostname for the proxy. A
client can attempt to fetch the PvD information from the well-known
URI to learn the list of complete URIs that support non-default
protocols, such as [CONNECTUDP] and [CONNECTIP].
3.1. Example
Given a known HTTP CONNECT proxy FQDN, "proxy.example.org", a client
could request PvD Additional Information with the following request:
:method = GET
:scheme = https
:authority = proxy.example.org
:path = /.well-known/pvd
accept = application/pvd+json
If the proxy has a PvD definition for this FQDN, it would return the
following response to indicate a PvD that has two related proxy URIs.
Pauly & Damjanovic Expires 15 April 2024 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Proxy Configuration PvDs October 2023
:status = 200
content-type = application/pvd+json
content-length = 222
{
"identifier": "proxy.example.org.",
"expires": "2023-06-23T06:00:00Z",
"prefixes": [],
"proxies": ["https://proxy.example.org","https://proxy.example.org/masque{?target_host,target_port}"]
}
The client would learn the URI template of the proxy that supports
UDP using [CONNECTUDP], at "https://proxy.example.org/
masque{?target_host,target_port}".
4. Split DNS information for proxies
Split DNS configurations are cases where only a subset of domains is
routed through a VPN tunnel or a proxy. For example, IKEv2 defines
split DNS configuration in [IKEV2SPLIT].
PvD Additional Information can be used to indicate that a proxy PvD
has a split DNS configuration.
Section 4.3 of [PVDDATA] defines the optional dnsZones key, which
contains searchable and accessible DNS zones as an array of strings.
When present in a PvD Additional Information dictionary that is
retrieved for a proxy as described in Section 2, domains in the
dnsZones array indicate specific zones that are accessible using the
proxy. If a hostname is not included in the enumerated zones, then a
client SHOULD assume that the hostname will not be accessible through
the proxy.
Entries listed in dnsZones MUST NOT expand the set of domains that a
client is willing to send to a particular proxy. The list can only
narrow the list of domains that the client is willing to send through
the proxy. For example, if the client has a local policy to only
send requests for "example.com" to a proxy "proxy.example.com", and
the dnsZones array contains "internal.example.com" and
"other.company.com", the client would end up only proxying
"internal.example.com" through the proxy.
Pauly & Damjanovic Expires 15 April 2024 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Proxy Configuration PvDs October 2023
4.1. Example
Given a proxy URI template "https://proxy.example.org/
masque{?target_host,target_port}", which in this case is for UDP
proxying, the client could request PvD additional information with
the following request:
:method = GET
:scheme = https
:authority = proxy.example.org
:path = /.well-known/pvd
accept = application/pvd+json
If the proxy has a PvD definition for this proxy, it could return the
following response to indicate a PvD that has one accessible zone,
"internal.example.org".
:status = 200
content-type = application/pvd+json
content-length = 135
{
"identifier": "proxy.example.org.",
"expires": "2023-06-23T06:00:00Z",
"prefixes": [],
"dnsZones": ["internal.example.org"]
}
The client could then choose to use this proxy only for accessing
names that fall within the "internal.example.org" zone.
5. Discovering proxies from network PvDs
[PVDDATA] defines how PvD Additional Information is discovered based
on network advertisements using Router Advertisements [RFC4861]. A
network defining its configuration via PvD information can include
the proxies key (Section 3) to inform clients of a list of proxies
available on the network.
This association of proxies with the network's PvD can be used as a
mechanism to discover proxies, as an alternative to PAC files.
However, client systems MUST NOT automatically send traffic over
proxies advertised in this way without explicit configuration,
policy, or user permission. For example, a client can use this
mechanism to choose between known proxies, such as if the client was
already proxying traffic and has multiple options to choose between.
Pauly & Damjanovic Expires 15 April 2024 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Proxy Configuration PvDs October 2023
Further security and experience considerations are needed for these
cases.
6. Security Considerations
Configuration advertised via PvD Additional Information, such DNS
zones or associated proxies, can only be safely used when fetched
over a secure TLS-protected connection, and the client has validated
that that the hostname of the proxy, the identifier of the PvD, and
the validated hostname identity on the certificate all match.
7. IANA Considerations
This document registers a new key in the "Additional Information PvD
Keys" registry.
JSON Key: proxies
Description: Array of proxy URIs associated with this PvD
Type: Array of strings
Example: ["https://proxy.example.com", "https://proxy.example.com/
masque{?target_host,target_port}"]
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[CONNECTIP]
Pauly, T., Schinazi, D., Chernyakhovsky, A., Kühlewind,
M., and M. Westerlund, "Proxying IP in HTTP", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-masque-connect-ip-13,
28 April 2023, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
draft-ietf-masque-connect-ip-13>.
[CONNECTUDP]
Schinazi, D., "Proxying UDP in HTTP", RFC 9298,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9298, August 2022,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9298>.
[HTTP] Fielding, R., Ed., Nottingham, M., Ed., and J. Reschke,
Ed., "HTTP Semantics", STD 97, RFC 9110,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9110, June 2022,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110>.
Pauly & Damjanovic Expires 15 April 2024 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Proxy Configuration PvDs October 2023
[JSON] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8259>.
[PVDDATA] Pfister, P., Vyncke, É., Pauly, T., Schinazi, D., and W.
Shao, "Discovering Provisioning Domain Names and Data",
RFC 8801, DOI 10.17487/RFC8801, July 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8801>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.
[URITEMPLATE]
Gregorio, J., Fielding, R., Hadley, M., Nottingham, M.,
and D. Orchard, "URI Template", RFC 6570,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6570, March 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6570>.
8.2. Informative References
[IKEV2SPLIT]
Pauly, T. and P. Wouters, "Split DNS Configuration for the
Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)",
RFC 8598, DOI 10.17487/RFC8598, May 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8598>.
[PVD] Anipko, D., Ed., "Multiple Provisioning Domain
Architecture", RFC 7556, DOI 10.17487/RFC7556, June 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7556>.
[RFC3040] Cooper, I., Melve, I., and G. Tomlinson, "Internet Web
Replication and Caching Taxonomy", RFC 3040,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3040, January 2001,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3040>.
[RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman,
"Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4861, September 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4861>.
Pauly & Damjanovic Expires 15 April 2024 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Proxy Configuration PvDs October 2023
Authors' Addresses
Tommy Pauly
Apple, Inc.
Email: tpauly@apple.com
Dragana Damjanovic
Microsoft
Email: ddamjanovic@microsoft.com
Pauly & Damjanovic Expires 15 April 2024 [Page 10]