EMU Working Group J. Salowey
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems, Inc.
Intended status: Informational February 18, 2008
Expires: August 21, 2008
Outline for Requirements for an EAP Tunnel Based Method
draft-salowey-emu-eaptunnel-req-00.txt
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of 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 August 21, 2008.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
Abstract
This memo provides an outline for the requirements for a Tunnel
Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) Method. This method will
use Transport Layer Security (TLS) to establish a tunnel. The tunnel
will support password authentication, EAP authentication and the
transport of additional data for other purposes.
Salowey Expires August 21, 2008 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft EAP Tunnel Method Requirements Outline February 2008
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Conventions Used In This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. General Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.1. RFC Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.2. Draw from existing work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.3. Use cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.3.1. Password authentication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.3.2. Chained EAP Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.3.3. Identity Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.3.4. Emergency Services Authentication . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.3.5. Network Endpoint Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.3.6. Credential Provisioning/Enrollment . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.3.7. Resource Constrained Environments . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Tunnel Establishment Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2.1. TLS Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2.1.1. Ciphersuites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2.1.2. TLS Extensions (OCSP, server name?, channel
binding?) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2.1.3. Client Authentication and Identity Privacy . . . . 5
3.2.1.4. Session Resumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2.2. Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2.3. EAP Header Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2.4. Privacy and EAP Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2.5. Additional Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3. Tunnel Payload Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3.1. Extensible Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3.2. Request/Challenge Response Operation . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3.3. Mandatory and Optional Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3.4. Vendor Specific Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3.5. Result Indication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4. Channel Binding Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4.1. Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4.2. Directionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4.3. Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5. Requirements Associated with Carrying Username and
Passwords . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5.1. security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5.1.1. Confidentiality and Integrity . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5.1.2. Authentication of Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5.1.3. Credential Validation (revocation validation) . . . 5
3.5.2. Internationalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5.2.1. Username . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5.2.2. Passwords . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Salowey Expires August 21, 2008 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft EAP Tunnel Method Requirements Outline February 2008
3.5.3. Meta-data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.5.4. Password Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.6. Requirements Associated with Carrying EAP Methods . . . . . 6
3.6.1. Method Negotiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.6.2. Method Chaining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.6.3. Cryptographic Binding with TLS Channel . . . . . . . . 6
3.6.4. Compound Keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.6.5. Intermediate Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.6.6. Client Initiated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.6.7. Method meta-data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 8
Salowey Expires August 21, 2008 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft EAP Tunnel Method Requirements Outline February 2008
1. Introduction
2. Conventions Used In This Document
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 [RFC2119]
3. Requirements
3.1. General Requirements
3.1.1. RFC Compliance
- 3784 (incl. security properties), 4017, EAP Keying, crypto agility
3.1.2. Draw from existing work
EAP-TLS, EAP-TTLS, EAP-FAST, PEAP
3.1.3. Use cases
3.1.3.1. Password authentication
3.1.3.2. Chained EAP Methods
3.1.3.3. Identity Protection
3.1.3.4. Emergency Services Authentication
3.1.3.5. Network Endpoint Assessment
3.1.3.6. Credential Provisioning/Enrollment
3.1.3.7. Resource Constrained Environments
Define Resource Constrained
3.2. Tunnel Establishment Requirements
3.2.1. TLS Requirements
3.2.1.1. Ciphersuites
3.2.1.2. TLS Extensions (OCSP, server name?, channel binding?)
Salowey Expires August 21, 2008 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft EAP Tunnel Method Requirements Outline February 2008
3.2.1.3. Client Authentication and Identity Privacy
3.2.1.4. Session Resumption
3.2.2. Fragmentation
3.2.3. EAP Header Protection
3.2.4. Privacy and EAP Identity
3.2.5. Additional Signaling
3.3. Tunnel Payload Requirements
3.3.1. Extensible Data Types
3.3.2. Request/Challenge Response Operation
3.3.3. Mandatory and Optional Attributes
3.3.4. Vendor Specific Support
3.3.5. Result Indication
3.4. Channel Binding Requirements
3.4.1. Definition
3.4.2. Directionality
3.4.3. Data Types
3.5. Requirements Associated with Carrying Username and Passwords
3.5.1. security
3.5.1.1. Confidentiality and Integrity
3.5.1.2. Authentication of Server
3.5.1.3. Credential Validation (revocation validation)
3.5.2. Internationalization
3.5.2.1. Username
3.5.2.2. Passwords
Salowey Expires August 21, 2008 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft EAP Tunnel Method Requirements Outline February 2008
3.5.3. Meta-data
Machine vs. User Authentication
3.5.4. Password Change
3.6. Requirements Associated with Carrying EAP Methods
3.6.1. Method Negotiation
3.6.2. Method Chaining
3.6.3. Cryptographic Binding with TLS Channel
3.6.4. Compound Keys
3.6.5. Intermediate Results
3.6.6. Client Initiated
3.6.7. Method meta-data
request specific credentials
4. IANA Considerations
This document has no IANA considerations.
5. Security Considerations
6. References
6.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-eap-keying]
Aboba, B., Simon, D., and P. Eronen, "Extensible
Authentication Protocol (EAP) Key Management Framework",
draft-ietf-eap-keying-22 (work in progress),
November 2007.
[I-D.ietf-tls-rfc4346-bis]
Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security
(TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", draft-ietf-tls-rfc4346-bis-09
(work in progress), February 2008.
Salowey Expires August 21, 2008 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft EAP Tunnel Method Requirements Outline February 2008
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
6.2. Informative References
[RFC4017] Stanley, D., Walker, J., and B. Aboba, "Extensible
Authentication Protocol (EAP) Method Requirements for
Wireless LANs", RFC 4017, March 2005.
Author's Address
Joseph Salowey
Cisco Systems, Inc.
2901 3rd. Ave
Seattle, WA 98121
USA
Email: jsalowey@cisco.com
Salowey Expires August 21, 2008 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft EAP Tunnel Method Requirements Outline February 2008
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
Salowey Expires August 21, 2008 [Page 8]