Network Working Group                                           R. Droms
Internet-Draft                                             Cisco Systems
Expires: April 24, 2003                                 October 24, 2002


   Use of IPsec for Securing DHCPv4 Messages Exchanged Between Relay
                           Agents and Servers
               draft-droms-dhcp-relay-agent-ipsec-00.txt

Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 24, 2003.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

   "DHCP Relay Agent Information Option" (RFC 3046) assumes that DHCP
   messages exchanged between relay agents and servers are not subject
   to attack.  This document describes how IPsec can be used to protect
   messages exchanged between relay agents and servers.

1. Introduction

   "DHCP Relay Agent Information Option" (RFC 3046 [1]) assumes that
   DHCP [6] messages exchanged between relay agents and servers are not
   subject to attack.  IPsec [7] can be used by DHCP relay agents and
   server to protect messages they exchange.



Droms                    Expires April 24, 2003                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft      Use of IPsec for DHCPv4 Messages        October 2002


2. Terminology

   This document uses the DHCP terminology from RFC 2131 and the relay
   agent terminology from RFC 3046.

3. Requirements

   The keywords MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD,
   SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL, when they appear in this
   document, are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [4].

4. Use of IPsec to secure DHCP messages

   Relay agents and servers that exchange messages securely can use
   IPsec mechanisms as described in this section.  Relay agents and
   servers MUST support manual configuration and installation of static
   keys.  If a client message is relayed through multiple relay agents,
   each of the relay agents must have established independent, pairwise
   trust relationships.  That is, if messages from client C will be
   relayed by relay agent A to relay agent B and then to the server,
   relay agents A and B must be configured to use IPSec for the messages
   they exchange, and relay agent B and the server must be configured to
   use IPSec for the messages they exchange.

   Relay agents and servers that support secure relay agent to server or
   relay agent to relay agent communication, MUST include an IPsec
   implementation with the following restrictions:

   o  The IPsec implementation MUST use ESP

   o  Packet authentication MUST be applied

   o  Encryption MAY be applied (i.e., NULL encryption can be used)


5. Security considerations

   Relay agent options are used by DHCP relay agents to provide
   additional information about DHCP clients to servers.  An attacker
   that can modify the contents of relay agent options may be able to
   spoof the identity of a DHCP client or mount a denial of service
   attack.

   "Authentication for DHCP Messages" (RFC 3118 [3]) defines a mechanism
   through which messages exchanged between DHCP clients and servers can
   be secured.  However, the mechanism in RFC 3118 does not provide any
   protection for relay agent options.  "The Authentication Suboption
   for the DHCP Relay Agent Option" [2] defines an alternative to the



Droms                    Expires April 24, 2003                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft      Use of IPsec for DHCPv4 Messages        October 2002


   use of IPsec for securing relay agent options.

   The use of IPsec for securing relay agent options in DHCP messages
   requires the existence of an IPsec implementation available to the
   relay agents and DHCP servers.  It also requires manual configuration
   of the participants, including manual distribution of keys.

References

   [1]  Patrick, M., "DHCP Relay Agent Information Option", RFC 3046,
        January 2001.

   [2]  Lemon, T. and M. Stapp, "The Authentication Suboption for the
        DHCP Relay Agent Option", draft-ietf-dhc-auth-suboption-00 (work
        in progress), June 2002.

   [3]  Droms, R. and W. Arbaugh, "Authentication for DHCP Messages",
        RFC 3118, June 2001.

   [4]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
        Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [5]  Narten, T., Nordmark, E. and W. Simpson, "Neighbor Discovery for
        IP Version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 2461, December 1998.

   [6]  Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", RFC 2131,
        March 1997.

   [7]  Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "Security Architecture for the
        Internet Protocol", RFC 2401, November 1998.


Author's Address

   Ralph Droms
   Cisco Systems
   300 Apollo Drive
   Chelmsford, MA  01824
   USA

   Phone: +1 978 497 4733
   EMail: rdroms@cisco.com









Droms                    Expires April 24, 2003                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft      Use of IPsec for DHCPv4 Messages        October 2002


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002).  All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English.

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
   BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
   HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
   MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.



















Droms                    Expires April 24, 2003                 [Page 4]