[Search] [txt|pdfized|bibtex] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01                                                         
HIP Working Group                                             A. Keranen
Internet-Draft                                                  Ericsson
Intended status: Experimental                           January 26, 2010
Expires: July 30, 2010


        Host Identity Protocol Signaling Message Transport Modes
                   draft-keranen-hip-over-hip-00.txt

Abstract

   This document specifies two transport modes for Host Identity
   Protocol signaling messages that allow conveying them over encrypted
   connections initiated with the Host Identity Protocol.

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   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 July 30, 2010.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2010 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



Keranen                   Expires July 30, 2010                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft    HIP Signaling Message Transport Modes     January 2010


   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 BSD License.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   3.  Protocol Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
     3.1.  Mode Negotiation in HIP Base Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . 3
     3.2.  HIP Messages on Encrypted Connections . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   5.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
     7.2.  Informational References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5































Keranen                   Expires July 30, 2010                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft    HIP Signaling Message Transport Modes     January 2010


1.  Introduction

   Host Identity Protocol [RFC5201] signaling messages can be exchanged
   over plain IP using the protocol number reserved for this purpose, or
   over UDP using the UDP port reserved for HIP NAT traversal
   [I-D.ietf-hip-nat-traversal].  When two hosts perform a HIP base
   exchange, they set up an encrypted connection between them for data
   traffic, but continue to use plain IP or UDP for HIP signaling
   messages.

   This document defines how the encrypted connection can be used also
   for HIP signaling messages.  Two different modes are defined: HIP
   over Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) and HIP over TCP.  The
   benefit of sending HIP messages over ESP is that all signaling
   traffic (including HIP headers) will be encrypted.  If HIP messages
   are sent over TCP (which in turn is transported over ESP), TCP can
   handle also message fragmentation where needed.


2.  Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].


3.  Protocol Extensions

   This section defines how support for different HIP signaling message
   transport modes is negotiated and the normative behavior required by
   the extension.

3.1.  Mode Negotiation in HIP Base Exchange

   A HIP host implementing this specification SHOULD indicate the modes
   it supports, and is willing to use, in the base exchange.  The HIP
   signaling message transport mode negotiation is similar to HIP NAT
   traversal mode negotiation: first the Responder lists the supported
   modes in a HIP_TRANSPORT_MODE parameter (see Figure 1) in the R1
   packet.  If the Initiator supports, and is willing to use, any of the
   modes proposed by the Responder, it selects one of the modes by
   adding a HIP_TRANSPORT_MODE parameter containing the selected mode to
   the I2 packet.  Finally, if the Initiator selected one of the modes
   and the base exchange succeeds, hosts use the selected mode for the
   following HIP signaling messages sent between them.






Keranen                   Expires July 30, 2010                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft    HIP Signaling Message Transport Modes     January 2010


      0                   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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |             Type              |             Length            |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |           Mode ID #1          |            Mode ID #2         |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |           Mode ID #n          |             Padding           |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

     Type       [ TBD by IANA; 990 ]
     Length     length in octets, excluding Type, Length, and padding
     Mode ID    defines the proposed or selected transport mode(s)

     The following mode IDs are defined:

         ID name   Value
         RESERVED    0
         ESP         1
         ESP-TCP     2

           Figure 1: Format of the HIP_TRANSPORT_MODE parameter

3.2.  HIP Messages on Encrypted Connections

   If the ESP mode is selected in the base exchange, both hosts MUST
   listen for incoming HIP signaling messages and send outgoing messages
   on the encrypted connection.  The ESP header's next header value for
   such messages MUST be set to HIP (139).

   If the ESP-TCP mode is selected, the Responder MUST start to listen
   for an incoming TCP connection on the port 10500 on the encrypted
   connection and the Initiator MUST create a TCP connection to the
   Responder on the same port.  The Initiator SHOULD use port 10500 as
   the source port for the TCP connection.  Once the TCP connection is
   established, both hosts MUST listen for incoming HIP signaling
   messages and send the outgoing messages using the TCP connection.
   The ESP next header value for messages sent using the ESP-TCP mode
   connections MUST be set to TCP (6).

   Since TCP provides reliable transport, the HIP messages sent over TCP
   MUST NOT be retransmitted for the purpose of achieving reliable
   transmission.  Instead, a host simply waits for the same time that
   would be taken by the maximum amount of retransmissions with
   unreliable transmission before concluding that there is no response.






Keranen                   Expires July 30, 2010                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft    HIP Signaling Message Transport Modes     January 2010


4.  Security Considerations

   By exchanging the HIP messages over ESP connection, all HIP signaling
   data (after the base exchange) will be encrypted, but only if NULL
   encryption is not used.  Thus, host requiring confidentiality for the
   HIP signaling messages must check that encryption is negotiated to be
   used on the ESP connection.


5.  Acknowledgements

   Thanks to Gonzalo Camarillo for comments on the draft.


6.  IANA Considerations

   This section is to be interpreted according to [RFC5226].

   This document updates the IANA Registry for HIP Parameter Types
   [RFC5201] by assigning new HIP Parameter Type value for the
   HIP_TRANSPORT_MODE parameter (defined in Section 3.1).


7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC5201]  Moskowitz, R., Nikander, P., Jokela, P., and T. Henderson,
              "Host Identity Protocol", RFC 5201, April 2008.

   [RFC5226]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
              IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
              May 2008.

7.2.  Informational References

   [I-D.ietf-hip-nat-traversal]
              Komu, M., Henderson, T., Tschofenig, H., Melen, J., and A.
              Keranen, "Basic HIP Extensions for Traversal of Network
              Address Translators", draft-ietf-hip-nat-traversal-09
              (work in progress), October 2009.







Keranen                   Expires July 30, 2010                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft    HIP Signaling Message Transport Modes     January 2010


Author's Address

   Ari Keranen
   Ericsson
   Hirsalantie 11
   02420 Jorvas
   Finland

   Email: Ari.Keranen@ericsson.com










































Keranen                   Expires July 30, 2010                 [Page 6]