Skip to main content

Multi-Authentication in IKEv2 with Post-quantum Security
draft-wang-ipsecme-multi-auth-ikev2-pq-01

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Guilin WANG , Wei Pan
Last updated 2026-07-06
RFC stream (None)
Intended RFC status (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-wang-ipsecme-multi-auth-ikev2-pq-01
IP Security Maintenance and Extensions                      G. Wang, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                       Huawei Int. Pte Ltd
Intended status: Standards Track                                  W. Pan
Expires: 7 January 2027                              Huawei Technologies
                                                             6 July 2026

        Multi-Authentication in IKEv2 with Post-quantum Security
               draft-wang-ipsecme-multi-auth-ikev2-pq-01

Abstract

   Motivated to mitigate security threats against quantum computers,
   this draft specifies a general authentication mechanism in the
   Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2) [RFC7296], called
   Multi-Authentication.  Namely, two peers can negotiate two or more
   authentication methods to authenticate each other.  The
   authentication methods selected do not necessarily belong to the same
   category.  This mechanism is achieved by adding a new value (17)
   (TBD) in the "IKEv2 Authentication Method" registry [IANA-IKEv2],
   maintained by IANA.  To run Multi-Authentication, two peers send the
   SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS Notify, defined in [RFC9593], to negotiate two
   or more authentication methods for authentication in IKEv2.

   [EDNOTE: Code points for Multi-Authentication may need to be assigned
   in the "IKEv2 Authentication Method" registry [IANA-IKEv2],
   maintained by IANA]

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 7 January 2027.

Wang & Pan               Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft        Multi-Authentication in IKEv2            July 2026

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2026 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 (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.  Change Logs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Changes Made in v01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Comparison to Mutiple Authentication  . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  Multi-Authentication in IKEv2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     5.1.  Challenges  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     5.2.  Basic Ideas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  Protocol Details for Multi-Authentication . . . . . . . . . .   7
     6.1.  Exchanges for Multi-Authentication  . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     6.2.  Payload Format for Multi-Authentication . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   9.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   10. Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   11. Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14

1.  Change Logs

1.1.  Changes Made in v01

   *  Added Section 4 to carefully compare with Multiple Authenticsiton
      introduced in [RFC4739].

   *  Updated references.

   *  Editorial changes.

Wang & Pan               Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft        Multi-Authentication in IKEv2            July 2026

2.  Introduction

   Cryptographically-relevant quantum computers (CRQC) pose a threat to
   data securely protected by current standards.  In particular, the so-
   called harvest-now-and-decrypt-later (HNDL) attack is considered an
   imminent threat.  To mitigate this threat against the Internet Key
   Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2) [RFC7296], multiple key exchanges
   in the IKEv2 [RFC9370] were introduced to achieve post-quantum (PQ)
   security.  To enable post-quantum security for the authentication in
   IKEv2, "Announcing Supported Authentication Methods in the Internet
   Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)" [RFC9593] specifies a new
   Notify type, called the SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS, which allows two
   peers to indicate the list of supported authentication methods while
   establishing IKEv2 SA.  One purpose of [RFC9593] is to support post-
   quantum signature algorithms for authentication in IKEv2, as further
   explored by the following drafts.

   "Signature Authentication in the Internet Key Exchange Version 2
   (IKEv2) using PQC" [I-D.ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-pqc-auth] specifies how
   NIST PQ digital algorithms ML-DSA [FIPS204] and SLH-DSA [FIPS205] can
   be used in IKEv2 by indicating the supported signature algorithms via
   exchanging the Notify SIGNATURE_HASH_ALGORITHMS, defined in
   [RFC7427].  On the other hand, "Post-Quantum Traditional (PQ/T)
   Hybrid PKI Authentication in the Internet Key Exchange Version 2
   (IKEv2)" [I-D.hu-ipsecme-pqt-hybrid-auth] specifies how to run
   general hybrid PQ/T digital algorithms in IKEv2.  The purspoe is
   achieved via introducing some extensions in the
   SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS Notify.

   In all of those Internet standard drafts, the corresponding public
   certificates and signatures for the involved signature algorithms are
   exchanged via the INTERMEDIATE Exchange, defined in [RFC9242].

   However, with the exception of authentication by composite signatures
   is specified in [I-D.hu-ipsecme-pqt-hybrid-auth], where the
   corresponding public keys can be certified by a composite certificate
   [I-D.ietf-lamps-pq-composite-sigs] or a related certificates
   [RFC9763], all others are single method authentication.  As discussed
   in [RFC9794] and [I-D.ietf-ipsecme-hybrid-kem-ikev2-frodo], hybrid is
   a more conservative approach to the migration from traditional
   algroithms to post-quantum (PQ) algorithms.  Moreover, there are a
   number of authentication methods for IKEv2 [IANA-IKEv2], including
   Shared Key Message Integrity Code (2), Generic Secure Password
   Authentication Method (12), several specific signature algorithms (3,
   9, 10, 11), general Digital Signature (14), and newly proposed KEM
   based authentication (16, TBD) [I-D.wang-ipsecme-kem-auth-ikev2].

Wang & Pan               Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft        Multi-Authentication in IKEv2            July 2026

   Motivated by the fact that there is a need of hybrid authentication,
   this draft specifies a general authentication mechanism for the
   Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2) [RFC7296], called
   Multi-Authentication.  Namely, two peers can negotiate two or more
   authentication methods to authenticate each other.  The
   authentication methods selected do not necessarily belong to the same
   category.  For example, two peers may select a traditional signature
   and a PQ signature (like ML-DSA [FIPS204]), or MAC based
   authentication and a PQ signature.

   This mechanism is achieved to ask a new value (17, TBD) in the "IKEv2
   Authentication Method" registry [IANA-IKEv2], maintained by IANA.  To
   run Multi-Authentication, two peers send the SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS
   Notify, defined in [RFC9593], to negotiate two or more authentication
   methods for authentication in IKEv2.  Finally, using the
   authentication methods selected, not necessarily the same algoithm in
   two directions, the peers SHALL authenticate the IKE data to each
   other, according to the specification in [RFC7296].

3.  Requirements Language

   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.

4.  Comparison to Mutiple Authentication

   It is noticed that [RFC4739] specifies a mechanism called Multiple
   Authentication Exchange to run two or more authentications in IKEv2.
   However, both the purpose of and mechanism used for Multiple
   Authentication [RFC4739] are different from Multi-Authentication
   specified in this draft.

   First of all, the main purpose of Multiple Authentication [RFC4739]
   is to run mulitple authentications to facilitate verification at
   diffent domains in IKEv2. "_For instance, it may be necessary to
   authenticate both the host (machine) requesting access, and the user
   currently using the host._ " (see Section 1 in [RFC4739]).  In
   contrast, the purpose of Multi-Authentication speficied in this draft
   is to enhance cryptographic resilience against quantum attacks, in
   particular during the transition period.  Moreover, [RFC4739] mainly
   considers how to run Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) methods
   [RFC3748] with the Authentication Methods for IKEv2 [IANA-IKEv2].
   This draft aims to run multiple authentications in IKEv2.

Wang & Pan               Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft        Multi-Authentication in IKEv2            July 2026

   Secondly, the mechanism in [RFC4739] is realized via two types of
   notification.  Two peers first run MULTIPLE_AUTH_SUPPORTED
   notification in the IKE_SA_INIT response (for the responder) and the
   first IKE_AUTH request (for the initiator) to indicate that they are
   willing to run further authentication.  After that, they exchange
   ANOTHER_AUTH_FOLLOWS notification in any IKE_AUTH message to complete
   the second authentication.  However, the mechanism proposed here is
   to extend the authentication announcement specified in [RFC9593],
   such that the two peers can negotiate two or more authentication
   methodsin IKEv2.  In Multiple Authentication Exchange, "_it is
   assumed that both peers know what credentials they want topresent;
   there is no negotiation about, for instance, what type of
   authentication is to be done._" (see Section 2.1 in [RFC4739]).

   Finally, to support PQ algorithms in IKEv2, it has to consider the
   large size for public keys and signatures in authentication.  So,
   IKEv2 message fragmentation has to be dealt with.  Based on [RFC7383]
   and [RFC9242], [RFC9593] supports IKEv2 message fragmentation
   inherently, and this draft does too.  However, [RFC4739], proposed in
   2006, does not support post-quantum algorithms at all.

5.  Multi-Authentication in IKEv2

5.1.  Challenges

   Here are the main challenging reasons why a general PQ secure
   solution is hard for the authentication in the IKEv2:

   *  For the key exchange in IKEv2, the algorithm selected SHALL be the
      same for both peers.  Different from this, two peers in the IKEv2
      authentication MAY select different authentication methods to
      authenticate themselves to the other.

   *  Authentication negotiation or indication in the IKEv2 is done via
      notifications, as shown in [RFC9593] and [RFC4739], not via normal
      message payloads in the IKE_SA_INIT or IKE_Auth, as the IKE key
      exchange does.

   *  However, in the IKE authentication, each peer has more information
      or requirement to transfer: which authentication methods it
      supports, which authentication methods it prefers to authenticate
      itself to the other peer, and which authentication methods it
      prefers that the other peer SHOULD select to be authenticated.
      All of this may be covered by a term like "authentication policy",
      from both peers.

Wang & Pan               Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft        Multi-Authentication in IKEv2            July 2026

   *  Even if the peers select the authentication methods both sides
      satisfied according to their preference, these methods may still
      fail for use, as there is still one more issue, certificates!
      Namely, the trust anchor of one peer may not be trusted by the
      other peer, when digital signature algorithms are selected for
      authentication in the IKEv2.

5.2.  Basic Ideas

   The basic idea proposed in this document is to mimic the addtional
   key exchange (ADDKE) proposed in [RFC9370].  Namely, when one peer A
   (the sender) sends SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS Notify payload to announce
   what the authentication methods it supports, this payload also
   transfers the info which methods it expects the other peer B SHALL
   select for authentication.  This is done by assigning different
   authentication methods into a few authentication sets, and the other
   peer B MUST select one of the methods in each authentication set.
   More importantly, the feedback from the other peer B (the replier) is
   intentionally constructed as the follows to transfer the replier's
   authentication policy to the sender A.

   *  1 authentication set: This means that B agrees to use this set for
      bidirectional authentication.  Namely, this implies that both A
      and B MUST use these methods in the authentication set to
      authenticate itself to the other.  If this set is empty, it means
      that B does not support any authentication method in each set.  If
      this set contains one or a number of NULL Authentication (13), it
      means that NULL Authentication (13) is a valid answer for one or a
      number of A's enquiring authentication sets.

   *  2 authentication sets: This means that B SHALL use the first
      authentication set to authenticate itself to A, and A SHALL use
      the 2nd set to authenticate itstelf to B.  In case the 2nd set is
      empty or just contains NULL Authentication (13), it means that B
      SHALL NOT require A to authenticate itself to B.

   *  3 or more authentication sets: Similar as the above, the first set
      is for B to authenticate itself to A, the 2nd set MUST be empty
      that means B cannot select a set of methods from all methods A has
      sent, such that this set also satisfies B's authentication policy
      how A SHOULD authenticate itself to B.  Therefore, after this
      empty set, all sets remaining are for expressing what B's
      authentication policy for A.

   For example, if A sends ten methods (a1, a2, ..., a10) via 3
   authentication sets, say (a2, a1, a3), (a4, a8, a9), and (a5, a6,
   a10, a7), according to A's preference.  Then, if B sends back (a1,
   a4, a7), this implicitly means that both A and B SHALL use a1, a4,

Wang & Pan               Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft        Multi-Authentication in IKEv2            July 2026

   and a7 to authenticate itself to the other peer.  Or, if B sends back
   two authentication sets, (a1, a4, a7) and (a2, a7), it means that B
   SHALL use a1, a4, and a7 to authenticate itself to A, and A SHOULD
   use a2 and a7 to authenticate itself to B.  Finally, in another case,
   if B sends back 4 sets, (a1, a4, a7), () (empty set), (a1, a3, a8),
   and (a11, a12), it means that B SHALL use a1, a4, and a7 to
   authenticate itself to A, and that B is asking A selects 2 methods
   from set 3 and 4 so that A SHALL authenticate itself to B, though by
   now B is not sure if A does support either a11 or a12.

   If one execution of the above procedures cannot achieve the
   authentication policy for either of the two peers, they MAY abort the
   procedure or restart by any of the two peers as the sender to initate
   this authentication method negotiation.

   For flexibility, authentication methods in sets are not supposed to
   exclusively belong to only one set, though this may be true in most
   cases.  The reason is that selecting the same method from two
   different sets does not make much sense for enhancing security,
   unless this method is NULL Authentication (13) for adding
   flexibility.

6.  Protocol Details for Multi-Authentication

   By following [RFC9593], two communicating peers send each other the
   Notify Message Type SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS to negotiate which
   authentication method(s) will be used to authenticate one of them to
   the other.  Basically, each of the authentication methods proposed
   can be any one registered in the "IKEv2 Authentication Method"
   registry under "Internet Key Exchange Version 2 (IKEv2) Parameters"
   [IANA-IKEv2], maintained by IANA.  To run multiple authentications,
   this document adds the value 17 (TBD) for "Multi-Authentication" in
   the "IKEv2 Authentication Method" registry (Section 8).

6.1.  Exchanges for Multi-Authentication

   After the initiator starts the IKE_SA_INIT exchange as usual, the
   responder sends the notify SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS with value of 17
   (TBD) to indicate that the responder wants to run Multi-
   Authentication with respect to several authentication sets of
   authentication methods, which the responder supports.  Each of these
   authentication sets will be listed in the SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS
   Notify Payload (Section 6.2), ordered by the responder's preference.

   After the initiator receives SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS via several
   authentication sets from the responder, it will try to prepare the
   best answer, i.e, one set, or two sets, or three sets, according to
   this specification given the above.

Wang & Pan               Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft        Multi-Authentication in IKEv2            July 2026

   Table 1 below shows how two peers use the SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS
   notification to run Multi-Authentication for the above example, where
   the responder's initial authentication sets are (a2, a1, a3), (a4,
   a8, a9), and (a5, a6, a10, a7), while the initiator sends back two
   authentication sets (a1, a4, a7) and (a2, a7) as its feedback.  In
   the protocol below, the IKE_INTERMEDIATE exchange MAY be used to
   faciliate the hybrid key exchange in the IKEv2 as specified in
   [RFC9370], and to transfer PQ certifates between the responder and
   the intitator for completing Multi-Authentication.

Initiator                                                  Responder
---------------------------------------------------------------------
HDR(IKE_SA_INIT), SAi1(.. ADDKE*..), --->
KEi, Ni, N(INTERMEDIATE_EXCHANGE_SUPPORTED), ..
                   <--- HDR(IKE_SA_INIT), SAr1(.. ADDKE*..), [CERTRQ,]
                        KEr, Nr, N(INTERMEDIATE_EXCHANGE_SUPPORTED), ..
                        N(SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS(17((a2a1a3),(a4a8a9),(a5a6a10a7))))..

                    ... (IKE_INTERMEDIATE for ADDKE) ...

HDR(IKE_AUTH), SK{IDi, [CERT,] [CERTRQ,]
[IDr,] AUTH, SAi2, TSi, TSr,
N(SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS(17(TBD)(a1a4a7),(a2a7)))} --->
                    ... (IKE_INTERMEDIATE for [CERT,]) ...
                   <--- HDR(IKE_AUTH), SK{IDr, [CERT,] AUTH, SAr2, TSi, TSr}
                                   ... (IKE_INTERMEDIATE for [CERT,]) ...

Fig. 1 An Example of Multi-Authentication between Two Peers

   If the resulting SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS notification with list of
   authentication methods is too long such that IP fragmentation
   [RFC7383] of the IKE_SA_INIT response may happen, the responder MAY
   choose to send empty SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS notification in the
   IKE_SA_INIT exchange response.  Then, the responder and the intiatior
   can send each other the SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS notification with list
   of authentication methods they support by using the IKE_INTERMEDIATE
   exchange, as desribed in Section 3.1 of [RFC9593].

   [EDNOTE: More examples may be provided later.]

6.2.  Payload Format for Multi-Authentication

   For easy reference, the SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS Notify payload format
   is shown in the following, as specified in Section 3.2 of [RFC9593].
   Correspondingly, here, Protocol ID field MUST be set to 0, the SPI
   Size MUST be set to 0 (meaning there is no SPI field), and the Notify
   Message Type MUST be set to 16443.

Wang & Pan               Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft        Multi-Authentication in IKEv2            July 2026

                           1                   2                   3
       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | Next Payload  |C|  RESERVED   |         Payload Length        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |  Protocol ID  |   SPI Size    |      Notify Message Type      |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                                                               |
      ~          List of Supported Auth Methods Announcements         ~
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

           Fig.2  SUPPORTED_AUTH_METHODS Notify Payload Format

   Payload Format for Multi-Authentication is defined in Fig. 3, which
   is treated as part of the Supported Auth Methods Announcements shown
   in Fig. 2.  Namely, for this part, a number (M) of Authentication
   Groups of authentication methods are listed, as desribed below.

   *  Length: Length of the whole blob of the announcement in octets;
      must be greater than 5.

   *  Multi-Auth: The value of "Multi-Authentication", which is supposed
      to be 17 (TBD).

   *  #Auth Group: The number of Authentication Groups listed in this
      announcement.

   *  #Auth Meth: The number of Authentication Methods in a given
      authentication group.

   *  Reserved: One byte reserved for future use.

   *  Auth Method: The value of one announced authentication method in a
      given authentication group.

   *  Cert Link: Links this announcement with a particular CA, which
      issued the public certificate for the Auth Method identified in
      AlgorithmIdentifiers below; see Section 3.2.2 of [RFC9593] for
      detail.  If this Auth Method is not related to the certificate,
      this information MUST be ignored.

   *  AlgID Len: Length of each authentication method algorithm ID, that
      is identified in AlgorithmIdentifier below, in octets.

   *  AlgorithmIdentifier: One or more variable-length ASN.1 objects
      that are encoded using Distinguished Encoding Rules (DER) [X.690]
      to identify one specific Authentication Method algorithm.

Wang & Pan               Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft        Multi-Authentication in IKEv2            July 2026

   Once two authentication sets have been negotiated, the corresponding
   authentication methods will be used for the IKE data for completing
   authentication, according to [RFC7296].  In the above example for
   Fig. 2, a1, a4, and a7 will be used to run multiple authentications
   from B to A, and a2 and a7 will be used to multi-authentication from
   A to B.  Once all those authentication methods are correctly verified
   by one side, then this directional authentication is successful.

                        1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Length (>5)  |   Multi-Auth  | #Auth Groups  | #Auth Meth 1  |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |    Reserved   | Auth Meth 1.1 | Cert Link 1.1 | AlgID Len 1.1 |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~                     AlgorithmIdentifier 1.1                   ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Auth Meth 1.2 | Cert Link 1.2 | AlgID Len 1.2 |               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+               |
   ~                     AlgorithmIdentifier 1.2                   ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~                              ...                              ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Auth Meth 1.N | Cert Link 1.N | AlgID Len 1.N |               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+               |
   ~                     AlgorithmIdentifier 1.N                   ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | #Auth Meth 2  |    Reserved   | Auth Meth 2.1 | Cert Link 2.1 |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | AlgID Len 2.1 |                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                                               |
   ~                     AlgorithmIdentifier 2.1                   ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~                                   ...                         ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | #Auth Meth M  |    Reserved   | Auth Meth M.1 | Cert Link M.1 |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | AlgID Len M.1 |                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                                               |
   ~                    AlgorithmIdentifier M.1                    ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~                                   ...                         ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Fig.3  Payload Format for Multi-Authentication Announcement

   [EDNOTE: More examples may be provided later.]

Wang & Pan               Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 10]
Internet-Draft        Multi-Authentication in IKEv2            July 2026

7.  Security Considerations

   Multi-authentication is a combination of multiple component
   authentication methods.  So, its security relies on the security of
   each component.  By requiring multi-authentication is successful if
   and only if each component authentication is successful, multi-
   authentication is secure at least one of the component authentication
   method is secure, with regarding to either traditional, quantum or
   traditional and quantum attacks.

   At the time of writing, there are no other security issues which may
   need to be considered.

8.  IANA Considerations

   This document adds a new type in the "IKEv2 Authentication Method"
   registry under "Internet Key Exchange Version 2 (IKEv2) Parameters"
   [IANA-IKEv2], maintained by IANA: .

            +==========+===================================+============+
            | Value    |    IKEv2 Authentication Method    | Reference  |
            +==========+===================================+============+
            | 17 (TBD) |  Composite ML-DSA Authentication  | This draft |
            +----------+-----------------------------------+------------+

9.  Acknowledgments

   To be added later.

10.  Normative References

   [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/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC4739]  Eronen, P. and J. Korhonen, "Multiple Authentication
              Exchanges in the Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol",
              RFC 4739, DOI 10.17487/RFC4739, November 2006,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4739>.

   [RFC7296]  Kaufman, C., Hoffman, P., Nir, Y., Eronen, P., and T.
              Kivinen, "Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2
              (IKEv2)", STD 79, RFC 7296, DOI 10.17487/RFC7296, October
              2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7296>.

Wang & Pan               Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 11]
Internet-Draft        Multi-Authentication in IKEv2            July 2026

   [RFC7383]  Smyslov, V., "Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2
              (IKEv2) Message Fragmentation", RFC 7383,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7383, November 2014,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7383>.

   [RFC7427]  Kivinen, T. and J. Snyder, "Signature Authentication in
              the Internet Key Exchange Version 2 (IKEv2)", RFC 7427,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7427, January 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7427>.

   [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/info/rfc8174>.

   [RFC9242]  Smyslov, V., "Intermediate Exchange in the Internet Key
              Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)", RFC 9242,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC9242, May 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9242>.

   [RFC9370]  Tjhai, CJ., Tomlinson, M., Bartlett, G., Fluhrer, S., Van
              Geest, D., Garcia-Morchon, O., and V. Smyslov, "Multiple
              Key Exchanges in the Internet Key Exchange Protocol
              Version 2 (IKEv2)", RFC 9370, DOI 10.17487/RFC9370, May
              2023, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9370>.

   [RFC9593]  Smyslov, V., "Announcing Supported Authentication Methods
              in the Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)",
              RFC 9593, DOI 10.17487/RFC9593, July 2024,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9593>.

   [FIPS203]  National Institute of Standards and Technology, "FIPS 203:
              Module-Lattice-Based Key-Encapsulation Mechanism
              Standard", Federal Information Processing Standards
              Publication , August 2024,
              <https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/
              NIST.FIPS.203.pdf>.

   [FIPS204]  National Institute of Standards and Technology, "FIPS 204:
              Module-Lattice-Based Digital Signature Standard", Federal
              Information Processing Standards Publication , August
              2024, <https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/
              NIST.FIPS.204.pdf>.

   [FIPS205]  National Institute of Standards and Technology, "FIPS 205:
              Stateless Hash-Based Digital Signature Standard", Federal
              Information Processing Standards Publication , August
              2024, <https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/FIPS/
              NIST.FIPS.204.pdf>.

Wang & Pan               Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 12]
Internet-Draft        Multi-Authentication in IKEv2            July 2026

   [X.690]    ITU-T, "Information Technology - ASN.1 encoding rules:
              Specification of Basic Encoding Rules (BER), Canonical
              Encoding Rules (CER) and Distinguished Encoding Rules
              (DER)", ISO/IEC 8825-1:2021 (E), ITU-T Recommendation
              X.690, February 2021.

   [IANA-IKEv2]
              "Internet Key Exchange Version 2 (IKEv2) Parameters", the
              Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA). ,
              <https://www.iana.org/assignments/ikev2-parameters/
              ikev2-parameters.xhtml>.

11.  Informative References

   [RFC3748]  Aboba, B., Blunk, L., Vollbrecht, J., Carlson, J., and H.
              Levkowetz, Ed., "Extensible Authentication Protocol
              (EAP)", RFC 3748, DOI 10.17487/RFC3748, June 2004,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3748>.

   [RFC9763]  Becker, A., Guthrie, R., and M. Jenkins, "Related
              Certificates for Use in Multiple Authentications within a
              Protocol", RFC 9763, DOI 10.17487/RFC9763, June 2025,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9763>.

   [RFC9794]  Driscoll, F., Parsons, M., and B. Hale, "Terminology for
              Post-Quantum Traditional Hybrid Schemes", RFC 9794,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC9794, June 2025,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9794>.

   [I-D.ietf-lamps-pq-composite-sigs]
              Ounsworth, M., Gray, J., Pala, M., Klaußner, J., and S.
              Fluhrer, "Composite Module-Lattice-Based Digital Signature
              Algorithm (ML-DSA) for use in X.509 Public Key
              Infrastructure", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
              ietf-lamps-pq-composite-sigs-19, 21 April 2026,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lamps-
              pq-composite-sigs-19>.

   [I-D.ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-pqc-auth]
              Reddy.K, T., Smyslov, V., and S. Fluhrer, "Signature
              Authentication in the Internet Key Exchange Version 2
              (IKEv2) using PQC", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
              draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-pqc-auth-08, 13 April 2026,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ipsecme-
              ikev2-pqc-auth-08>.

Wang & Pan               Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 13]
Internet-Draft        Multi-Authentication in IKEv2            July 2026

   [I-D.ietf-ipsecme-hybrid-kem-ikev2-frodo]
              WANG, G., Bruckert, L., Smyslov, V., and M. Chen, "Post-
              quantum Key Exchange in IKEv2 with FrodoKEM", Work in
              Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-ipsecme-hybrid-kem-
              ikev2-frodo-01, 4 July 2026,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ipsecme-
              hybrid-kem-ikev2-frodo-01>.

   [I-D.hu-ipsecme-pqt-hybrid-auth]
              Hu, J., Morioka, Y., and G. WANG, "Post-Quantum
              Traditional (PQ/T) Hybrid PKI Authentication in the
              Internet Key Exchange Version 2 (IKEv2)", Work in
              Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-hu-ipsecme-pqt-hybrid-
              auth-05, 26 June 2026,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-hu-ipsecme-
              pqt-hybrid-auth-05>.

   [I-D.wang-ipsecme-kem-auth-ikev2]
              WANG, G. and V. Smyslov, "KEM-based Authentication for
              IKEv2 with Post-quantum Security", Work in Progress,
              Internet-Draft, draft-wang-ipsecme-kem-auth-ikev2-04, 3
              July 2026, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-
              wang-ipsecme-kem-auth-ikev2-04>.

Authors' Addresses

   Guilin Wang (editor)
   Huawei Int. Pte Ltd
   9 North Buona Vista Drive, #13-01
   The Metropolis Tower 1
   SINGAPORE 138588
   Singapore
   Email: wang.guilin@huawei.com

   Wei Pan
   Huawei Technologies
   101 Software Avenue, Yuhuatai District
   Nanjing, Jiangsu
   138588
   China
   Email: william.panwei@huawei.com

Wang & Pan               Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 14]