Diameter Maintenance and                                 S. Decugis, Ed.
Extensions (DIME)                                                   NICT
Internet-Draft                                              June 8, 2009
Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: December 10, 2009


       Diameter support for EAP Re-authentication Protocol (ERP)
                  draft-sdecugis-dime-diameter-erp-01

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 December 10, 2009.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
   publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.

Abstract

   The EAP Re-authentication Protocol (ERP) provides a mechanism to
   optimize EAP authentication delay in the case of re-authentication,



Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


   which can be significant in roaming mobile situation.  This mechanism
   assumes that a protocol for Authentication, Authorization and
   Accounting (AAA) is available to transport ERP between the
   authenticator(s) and the EAP/ERP server.
   draft-gaonkar-radext-erp-attrs-03 specifies the transport of ERP
   using RADIUS.  This document specifies the transport of ERP using
   Diameter.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     1.1.  Differences with other documents . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     2.1.  Requirements Language  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   4.  Application Id . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   5.  AVPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     5.1.  ERP-RK-Request AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     5.2.  ERP-Realm AVP  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     5.3.  ERP-RK-Answer AVP  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     5.4.  ERP-RK AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     5.5.  ERP-RK-Name AVP  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     5.6.  ERP-RK-Lifetime AVP  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   6.  Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   7.  Bootstrapping options  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     7.1.  Bootstrapping during initial EAP authentication  . . . . .  8
     7.2.  Bootstrapping during first re-authentication . . . . . . . 10
   8.  Re-Authentication  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   9.  Sessions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   10. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   11. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   12. IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
     12.1. Diameter ERP application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
     12.2. New AVPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   13. Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     14.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     14.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17













Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


1.  Introduction

   [RFC5296] defines the EAP Re-authentication Protocol (ERP) and
   mechanism that consists in the two following steps:

   1.  Bootstrapping: creation of a root key for re-authentication,
       after initial EAP authentication of the peer.  This root key is
       distributed from the EAP server to the ER server.  How this key
       is tranported is not specified in the ERP mechanism.

   2.  Re-authentication: one-round-trip exchange between the peer and
       the ER server, functionally equivalent to a full EAP
       authentication.

   This document specifies how Diameter is used to carry the re-
   authentication exchange (second step).  For this purpose, we define a
   new Application Id for ERP, and re-use the Diameter EAP commands
   (DER/DEA).

   We also discuss the key distribution (first step, bootstrapping) and
   propose some solutions for different architectures.  Anyway,
   implementors are free to choose a different mechanism for key
   distribution, as for example using RADIUS [I-D.ietf-hokey-key-mgm].
   Security considerations for key distribution are explained in
   [RFC5295].

1.1.  Differences with other documents

   This document differs from [I-D.ietf-dime-erp] in its design and
   scope.  In this new version, we use a new Diameter application id for
   messages with ERP payload exchanged between authenticator and ER
   server.  This simplifies the routing of Diameter messages to the
   appropriate server, and allows more flexibility in the deployment of
   ERP.

   The scope of previous documents ([I-D.ietf-dime-erp] and
   [I-D.wu-dime-local-keytran]) was focused on the bootstrapping of the
   mechanism.  In particular, these documents did not consider the
   routing of Diameter message for re-authentication exchanges (ERP
   exchange, and also [RFC4187] for the second document).  By re-using
   the Diameter EAP application, they create implicit constraints on
   routing of messages that cannot be met by standard Diameter routing
   algorithm, as defined in the Diameter Base Protocol [RFC3588].

   A separate Diameter application solves this routing issue, and can
   also allow the authenticator to dynamically discover if the local
   domain supports re-authentication or not.




Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


2.  Terminology

   We re-use in this document the terminology from [RFC5296].  In
   particular, unless specified otherwise, the EAP server has implicit
   support for ERP extensions for generation of ERP keying material and
   its transmission to ER server.  These terms "authenticator", "ER
   server", "EAP server" designate logical functional entities and make
   no assumption on the real implementation and deployment.

   "Root key" (RK) or "bootstrapping material" refer to the rRK or rDSRK
   derived from an EMSK, depending on the location of the ER server in
   home or foreign domain.

   We re-use also some terminology and abbreviations from [RFC4072], for
   example DER/DEA.

2.1.  Requirements Language

   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.  Overview

   During the lifetime of an EMSK (derived during a full EAP
   authentication by compatible EAP methods), a peer may attach to
   several authenticators.  In this case, re-authentication is more
   efficient than full authentication, especially in the case of
   roaming.  ERP provides a mechanism for re-authentication independent
   of the link layer, so it can be used in case of multihoming or
   handovers between different access technologies.  The following
   figure shows the components involved in ERP, and their interactions.
   When the peer attaches to a new authenticator, the ER server involved
   in the transaction may change, for example in the case of inter-
   domain roaming.  The home EAP server is assumed to be constant for a
   given peer.

                           Diameter                    +--------+
           +-------------+   ERP   +-----------+  (*)  |  Home  |
   Peer <->|Authenticator|<=======>| ER server | <---> |  EAP   |
           +-------------+         +-----------+       | server |
                                                       +--------+
       (*) Several protocols can be used between ER server and
          home EAP server to transport bootstrapping material.

        Figure 1. Diameter applications used in the ERP mechanism.

   The ER server may be located in the home domain (same as EAP server)



Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


   or the visited domain (same as authenticator, when it differs from
   the home domain).  [[Editor1: Can the ER server be located in a third
   domain (ex: broker's)?]]

   The bootstrapping of the ER server has to occur sometime between the
   initial EAP authentication and the first ERP re-authentication with
   this ER server.  See section Section 7 for detail on this process.
   Then, the peer re-authenticates, for example after a movement that
   makes it attach to a new authenticator.  The following figure
   describes this re-authentication, and shows how Diameter is used in
   this context.  See section Section 8 for a detailed description, and
   following sections for details on the Diameter messages format.

                                                        ER server
                                                      (bootstrapped)
 Peer                 Authenticator               (local or home domain)
 ====                 =============               ======================
 [ <------------------------         ]
 [optional EAP-Initiate/Re-auth-start]

   ----------------------->
     EAP-Initiate/Re-auth
                           ==================================>
                                Diameter ERP, cmd code DER
                                  User-Name: Keyname-NAI
                              EAP-Payload: EAP-Initiate/Re-auth

                           <==================================
                                Diameter ERP, cmd code DEA
                              EAP-Payload: EAP-Finish/Re-auth
                               EAP-Master-Session-Key: rMSK
    <----------------------
      EAP-Finish/Re-auth

                     Figure 2. Diameter ERP exchange.

4.  Application Id

   We define a Diameter ERP Application in this document, with an
   Application Id value of [[IANA1: TBD]].  Diameter nodes conforming to
   this specification (in the role of ER server or authenticator) MUST
   advertise support by including the Diameter ERP Application ID value
   in the Auth-Application-Id AVP of the Capabilities-Exchange-Request
   and Capabilities-Exchange-Answer command [RFC3588].

   The primary use of the Diameter ERP Application Id is to ensure
   proper routing of the messages, and that the nodes that advertise the
   support for this application do understand the new AVPs defined in



Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


   the next section (although these AVP have the 'M' flag cleared).

5.  AVPs

   This specification defines the following new AVPs.

5.1.  ERP-RK-Request AVP

   The ERP-RK-Request AVP (AVP Code [[IANA2: TBD]]) is of type grouped
   AVP.  It is used by the ER server to request root key material used
   in ERP.

   This AVP has the M and V bits cleared.

         ERP-RK-Request ::= < AVP Header: TBD >
                            { ERP-Realm }
                          * [ AVP ]

                       Figure 3. ERP-RK-Request ABNF

5.2.  ERP-Realm AVP

   The ERP-Realm AVP (AVP Code [[IANA3: TBD]]) is of type [[Editor2:
   DiameterIdentity?  OctetString?]].  It contains the name of the realm
   in which the ER server is located.

   [[Editor3: FFS: We may re-use Origin-Realm here instead?  On the
   other hand, ERP-Realm may be useful in CER/CEA with a NAS...]]

   This AVP has the M and V bits cleared.

5.3.  ERP-RK-Answer AVP

   The ERP-RK-Answer AVP (AVP Code [[IANA4: TBD]]) is of type grouped
   AVP.  It is used by the home EAP server to provide ERP root key
   material to the ER server.

   This AVP has the M and V bits cleared.

          ERP-RK-Answer ::= < AVP Header: TBD >
                            { ERP-RK }
                            { ERP-RK-Name }
                            { ERP-RK-Lifetime }
                          * [ AVP ]

                       Figure 4. ERP-RK-Answer ABNF





Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


5.4.  ERP-RK AVP

   The ERP-RK AVP (AVP Code [[IANA5: TBD]]) is of type OctetString.  It
   contains the root key (either rRK or rDSRK) to be used for ERP with
   the peer to which the current session belongs.  How this material is
   derived and used is specified in [RFC5296].

   [[Editor4: Can we re-use EAP-Master-Session-Key here?]]

   This AVP has the M and V bits cleared.

5.5.  ERP-RK-Name AVP

   The ERP-RK AVP (AVP Code [[IANA6: TBD]]) is of type OctetString.
   This AVP contains the EMSKname which identifies the keying material.
   How this name is derived is beyond the scope of this document and
   defined in [RFC5296].

   [[Editor5: Can we re-use EAP-Key-Name here?]]

   This AVP has the M and V bits cleared.

5.6.  ERP-RK-Lifetime AVP

   The ERP-RK-Lifetime AVP (AVP Code [[IANA7: TBD]]) is of type
   [[Editor6: Unsigned64? 32?]] and contains the root key material
   remaining lifetime in seconds.  It MUST not be greater than the
   remaining lifetime of the EMSK it is derived from.  [[Editor7: FFS:
   is it better to pass an absolute value here, for example expiration
   date?  How to express it then (TZ, ...)?  Synchronization problems?]]

   This AVP has the M and V bits cleared.

6.  Commands

   We do not define any new command in this specification.  We reuse the
   Diameter-EAP-Request and Diameter-EAP-Answer commands defined in
   [RFC4072].

   The Application Id field in the command header [[Editor8: and the
   value in Auth-Application-Id AVP which is redundant???]] can be set
   to Diameter EAP application or Diameter ERP application, depending on
   the situation, as explained in the next sections.

   Since the original ABNF of these commands allow other optional AVPs
   ("* [ AVP ]"), and the new AVPs defined in this specification do not
   have the 'M' flag set, the ABNF does not need any change.  Anyway, a
   Diameter node that advertize support for the Diameter ERP application



Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


   MUST support the ERP-RK-Request and ERP-RK-Answer AVP [[Editor9:
   Therefore, in DER/DEA with Diameter ERP application ID, do we set the
   'M' flag to these AVPs?]].

      Command-Name          Abbrev. Code Reference Application
      ---------------------------------------------------------
      Diameter-EAP-Request  DER     268  RFC 4072  Diameter ERP
      Diameter-EAP-Answer   DEA     268  RFC 4072  Diameter ERP

                          Figure 5. Command Codes

7.  Bootstrapping options

   Bootstrapping involves the ER server and the EAP server directly, but
   also indirectly the peer and the authenticator.  For ERP to be
   successful, the peer must derive the same keying material as the ER
   server.  To make this possible, it must learn the domain name of the
   ER server.  How this is achieved is outside the scope of this
   specification, but it usually involves that the authenticator is
   configured to advertize this domain name.  This could be achieved for
   example by including the ERP-Realm AVP in a CER/CEA exchange.

   As stated in the Section 3, the bootstrapping of an ER server has to
   happen between the initial EAP authentication of the peer, when the
   EMSK is created, and the moment the peer re-authenticates with this
   ER server, when the bootstrapping material is needed.  While
   asynchrounous solutions are perfectly possible, it is usually easier
   to bootstrap the ER server during one of these events.

7.1.  Bootstrapping during initial EAP authentication

   Bootstrapping an ER server during the initial EAP authentication
   offers the advantage that the server is immediatly available for re-
   authentication of the peer, thus minimizing the re-authentication
   delay.

   On the other hand, re-authentication may only concern a small number
   of peers in the visited domain.  Deriving and caching key material
   for all the peers (for example, for the peers that do not support
   ERP, or that are not mobile) is a waste of resources and SHOULD be
   avoided.  In addition, bootstrapping ERP during full EAP
   authentication may prevent re-authentication in case of inter-domain
   roaming.  Hence, while this mecanism is useful in some situations, it
   should be deployed with care.

   In the case where ER server is collocated with the Home EAP server,
   ER bootstrapping is transparent with regards to this specification,
   although some sort of communication might be needed inside the node.



Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


   In this case, the server MUST advertise support of both the Diameter
   EAP application and the Diameter ERP application, but the new AVPs
   defined in this specification are not used.

   When ER server and EAP server are different entities with regards to
   Diameter, one or more Diameter EAP proxy(ies) is(are) needed in the
   same domain as the ER server.  While this(these) proxy(ies) might be
   separate entity(ies) with secure communication channel with the ER
   server, it is functionally equivalent to consider that the ER server
   acts as a Diameter EAP proxy.  In the rest of this section, we
   consider that the ER server acts as a Diameter EAP proxy in its
   domain.

   In order to bootstrap the ER server during full EAP authentication,
   this server must be on the route, and act as a proxy, for the first
   and last round of exchanges of the full EAP authentication, as
   captured in the figure bellow.

                            ER server &
   Authenticator             EAP Proxy               Home EAP server
   =============            ===========              ===============
        ------------------------->
            Diameter EAP/DER
             (EAP-Response)
                                  ------------------------->
                                     Diameter EAP/DER
                                      (EAP-Response)
                                     (ERP-RK-Request)

        <==================================================>
           Multi-round Diameter EAP exchanges, unmodified

                                  <-------------------------
                                      Diameter EAP/DEA
                                       (EAP-Success)
                                           (MSK)
                                      (ERP-RK-Answer)
        <-------------------------
            Diameter EAP/DEA
              (EAP-Success)
                  (MSK)
               [ERP-Realm]

        Figure 6. ERP bootstrapping during full EAP authentication

   The ER server proxies the first DER of the full EAP authentication
   and adds the ERP-RK-Request AVP inside, if this AVP is not already in
   the message, then forwards the request.



Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


   If the EAP server does not support ERP extensions, it will simply
   ignore this grouped AVP and continue as specified in [RFC4072].  If
   the server supports the ERP extensions, it caches the ERP-Realm value
   with the session, and continues the EAP authentication.  When the
   authentication is complete, if it is successful and the EAP method
   generated an EMSK, the server MUST compute the rRK or rDSRK
   (depending on the value of ERP-Realm) as specified in [RFC5296], and
   add an ERP-RK-Answer AVP in the Diameter-EAP-Request message, in
   addition to the MSK and EAP-Success payload.  [[Editor10: FFS: is it
   important to check that the server that added the ERP-RK-Request is
   in the path of the answer?  What's the worst that can happen?]]

   When the ER server proxies a Diameter-EAP-Answer message with a
   Session-Id corresponding to a message to which it added an ERP-RK-
   Answer, and the Result-Code is DIAMETER_SUCCESS, it MUST examine the
   message and remove any ERP-RK-Answer AVP, and save its content.  If
   the message does not contain an ERP-RK-Answer AVP, the ER server MAY
   save this information to avoid possible attempts later for this
   session.  In any case, the information stored SHOULD NOT have a
   lifetime greater than the EMSK lifetime [[Editor11: FFS: how does the
   ER server knows the EMSK lifetime, if there is no ERP-RK-Answer?
   What is the lifetime of the MSK for example?]]

   If the ER server is successfully bootstrapped, it MAY also add the
   ERP-Realm AVP after removing the ERP-RK-Answer AVP in the Diameter-
   EAP-Answer message.  This could be used by the authenticator to
   notify the peer that ERP is bootstrapped, with the ER domain
   information.  How this information can be transmitted to the peer is
   outside the scope of this document.  [[Editor12: Is it possible?  It
   would be useful...]]

7.2.  Bootstrapping during first re-authentication

   Bootstrapping the ER server during the first re-authentication offers
   several advantages: it saves resources, since we generate and cache
   only useful keying material, it can also accomodate inter-domain
   roaming or ER servers that loose their state (for example after
   reboot).

   On the other hand, the first re-authentication with the ER server
   requires a one-round-trip with the home EAP server, which adds some
   delay to the process (but it is more efficient than a full EAP
   authentication in any case).  Note that following re-authentications
   for the same session with the same ER server will not have this
   additional delay.

   [RFC5296] describes two types of bootstrapping for ERP: implicit
   bootstrapping and explicit bootstrapping.  In implicit bootstrapping,



Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


   the peer knows the domain it is located in, and assumes that the ER
   server already possess the keying material for the session.  In this
   case, the peer uses a Keyname-NAI in the form "EMSKname@localdomain".
   In explicit bootstrapping, the Keyname-NAI is in the form
   "EMSKname@homedomain".  As we will see in next section Section 8, the
   domain part of the Keyname-NAI becomes the Destination-Realm of the
   Diameter message, and the Application Id is set to Diameter ERP
   application.

   In the case of implicit bootstrapping (how the peer learns that the
   ER server is bootstrapped is outside the scope of this specification)
   or after a first succesful re-authentication in the visited domain,
   the message is routed to the local ER server following normal
   Diameter routing.  If the ER server does not have key information
   corresponding to this EMSKname, [[Editor13: return an error to the
   peer? proxy the request and send ERP-RK-Request to the home EAP
   server?  How do we learn which is the home domain?]].  See the next
   section Section 8 for detail.

   In the case of explicit bootstrapping (the ERP message has its 'B'
   flag set), if an ER server exists in the visited domain, it SHOULD be
   configured for and act as a Diameter ERP proxy, and process the
   messages as described below.  If not, the ER server in the home
   domain will be used, which is less efficient.  The description that
   follow for the ER server in the visited domain is also valid for the
   ER server in the home domain.

   [[Editor14: What should we do if the ER server receives an explicit
   bootstrapping request but already possess the rDSRK?]]

   The ER server proxies the request (DER with Diameter ERP application
   code) as follow, in addition to standard proxy operations:

      Change the Application Id in the header of the message to Diameter
      EAP Application (code 5).  [[Editor15: What about the Application-
      Auth-Id AVP?]]

      Add the ERP-RK-Request AVP, which contains the name of the domain
      the ER server is located in (with regards to ERP).

   Then the request is forwarded as usual.  With its Diameter EAP
   application id and Destination-Realm set to the home domain of the
   peer, the request reaches the home EAP server.  If this server does
   not support ERP extensions, it replies with an error since the
   encapsulated EAP-Initiate/Re-auth command is not understood.
   Otherwise, it processes the ERP request as described in [RFC5296].
   In particular, it includes the Domain-Name TLV attribute with the
   content from the ERP-Realm AVP.  It creates the DEA reply message



Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


   following standard processing from [RFC4072] (in particular EAP-
   Master-Session-Key AVP is used to transport the rMSK), and includes
   the ERP-RK-Answer AVP.

   The ER server receives this DEA and proxies it as follow, in addition
   to standard proxy operations:

      Set the Application Id back to Diameter ERP (code [[IANA8: TBD]])

      Extract and cache the content of the ERP-RK-Answer.

   The DEA is then forwarded to the authenticator, that can use the rMSK
   as described in [RFC5296].

   The figure below captures this Diameter ERP Proxy behavior:

   Authenticator            ER server             Home EAP server
   =============            =========             ===============
         ----------------------->
             Diameter ERP/DER
              (EAP-Initiate)
                                 ------------------------>
                                       Diameter EAP/DER
                                        (EAP-Initiate)
                                       (ERP-RK-Request)

                                 <------------------------
                                       Diameter EAP/DEA
                                         (EAP-Finish)
                                        (ERP-RK-Answer)
                                            (rMSK)
         <----------------------
             Diameter ERP/DEA
               (EAP-Finish)
                  (rMSK)

             Figure 7. ERP explicit bootstrapping message flow

8.  Re-Authentication

   This section describes a re-authentication exchange with a
   bootstrapped ER server.  The peer is assumed to know the domain of
   the bootstrapped ER server in advance.  See previous section
   Section 7 for more information.  EAP-Initiate/Re-auth-start with
   Domain-Name TLV is a possibility for the peer to learn the domain of
   the ER server attached to the authenticator.

   The following figure describes the re-authentication exchange.



Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009              [Page 12]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


   Explication follow.

                                                Bootstrapped ER server
Peer                 Authenticator             (in local or home domain)
====                 =============             =========================
[ <------------------------         ]
[optional EAP-Initiate/Re-auth-start]

   ----------------------->
    EAP-Initiate/Re-auth
                           =================================>
                               Diameter ERP, cmd code DER
                                 User-Name: Keyname-NAI
                            EAP-Payload: EAP-Initiate/Re-auth

                           <=================================
                               Diameter ERP, cmd code DEA
                             EAP-Payload: EAP-Finish/Re-auth
                              EAP-Master-Session-Key: rMSK
   <----------------------
     EAP-Finish/Re-auth

                      Figure 8. Diameter ERP exchange

   The authenticator that does not support ERP [RFC4072] discards EAP
   packets with unknown ERP-specific code (EAP-Initiate).  The peer
   falls back to full EAP authentication in that case.

   When the ERP-compatible authenticator receives an EAP-Initiate/
   Re-auth message from the peer (or after having sent a EAP-Initiate/
   Re-auth-start packet), it process as described in [RFC5296] with
   regards to the EAP state machine, and similarly to Diameter EAP
   [RFC4072], with regards to Diameter, with the following differences:

      The application id is set to Diameter ERP instead of Diameter EAP.

      The User-Name and Destination-Realm are derived from the Keyname-
      NAI.

      [[Editor16: How do we create / retrieve the Session-Id?]]

   The ER server receives this request and process the ERP payload as
   described in [RFC5296].  If re-authentication is successful, it
   creates a DEA answer as described in Diameter EAP, with the following
   differences:

      The application id is set to Diameter ERP.




Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009              [Page 13]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


      The EAP-Payload AVP contains the ERP message: EAP-Finish/Re-auth

      The EAP-Master-Session-Key AVP contains the rMSK

      The Result-Code AVP contains DIAMETER_SUCCESS.

   In case the re-authentication fails, the Result-Code AVP contains an
   error code, and no EAP-Master-Session-Key AVP is included.

   When the authenticator receives this answer, it processes it as
   described in Diameter EAP: forwards the EAP payload to the peer, and
   use the rMSK as a shared secret in Secure Association Protocol.

9.  Sessions

   This section describes how sessions are handled in case of re-
   authentication.

   [[Editor17: The content of this section is to be written, I am just
   listing the ideas here.]]

   See guidelines in [I-D.ietf-dime-app-design-guide].

   During initial full EAP authentication, the identity of the peer is
   used to create the Session-Id AVP, which is then used during
   accounting.  When the peer attaches to a new authenticator and
   performs ERP, its identity is not disclosed to the authenticator.
   Instead, the peer presents the Keyname-NAI.  This identifiers
   contains the EMSKName as user part.  The new authenticator will
   therefore derive the new Session-Id from this EMSKName and use this
   for accounting purpose.

   Although the home EAP server is able to link EMSKName with the peer's
   identity, the other Diameter entities do not have this mapping.  In
   particular, the realm part of Keyname-NAI is the visited network.
   How does the authenticator figures out that the account records must
   be sent to the home domain of the peer?

   It is possible to cache the necessary information at the ER server
   level.  Is it useful to specify this mechanism in this document?  It
   would involve:

      An additional AVP during bootstrapping of ER server, in the ERP-
      RK-Answer, to pass the real User-Name and Session-Id (only in case
      of explicit bootstrapping)

      An additional AVP in Diameter ERP/DEA (EAP-Finish/Re-Auth) to pass
      the real Session-Id and User-Name and Destination-Realm of the re-



Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009              [Page 14]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


      authenticated peer, for accounting messages.

10.  Contributors

   Hannes Tschofenig, Lakshminath Dondeti, Julien Bournelle, and Lionel
   Morand wrote the initial Diameter ERP draft document.

11.  Acknowledgements

   Vidya Narayanan reviewed a rough draft version of the previous
   document and found some errors.

   Qin Wu and Glen Zorn actively participated in the discussions on the
   design for Diameter ERP, providing the point of view and experience
   from HOKEY workgroup.

   Hannes Tschofenig provided useful advices for the writing of this
   document.

   Many thanks to these people!

12.  IANA Considerations

   This document requires IANA registration of the following new
   elements in the Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting (AAA)
   Parameters [1] registries.

12.1.  Diameter ERP application

   This specification requires IANA to allocate a new value "Diameter
   ERP" in the "Application IDs" registry created by in [RFC3588].

      Application Identifier             | Value
      -----------------------------------+------
      Diameter ERP                       | TBD

              IANA consideration for Diameter ERP application

12.2.  New AVPs

   This specification requires IANA to allocate new values from the "AVP
   Codes" registry defined in [RFC3588] for the following AVPs:

      ERP-RK-Request

      ERP-Realm





Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009              [Page 15]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


      ERP-RK-Answer

      ERP-RK

      ERP-RK-Name

      ERP-RK-Lifetime

   These AVPs are defined in section Section 5.

13.  Security Considerations

   The security considerations from the following RFC apply here:
   [RFC3588], [RFC4072], [RFC5247], [RFC5295], and [RFC5296].

   [[Editor18: FFS: Do we really respect these security considerations
   with the mechanism we describe here?  Is it safe to use ERP-RK-
   Request / Answer AVPs?  What is the worst case?]]

14.  References

14.1.  Normative References

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

   [RFC3588]                         Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman,
                                     E., Zorn, G., and J. Arkko,
                                     "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588,
                                     September 2003.

   [RFC4072]                         Eronen, P., Hiller, T., and G.
                                     Zorn, "Diameter Extensible
                                     Authentication Protocol (EAP)
                                     Application", RFC 4072,
                                     August 2005.

   [RFC5295]                         Salowey, J., Dondeti, L.,
                                     Narayanan, V., and M. Nakhjiri,
                                     "Specification for the Derivation
                                     of Root Keys from an Extended
                                     Master Session Key (EMSK)",
                                     RFC 5295, August 2008.

   [RFC5296]                         Narayanan, V. and L. Dondeti, "EAP
                                     Extensions for EAP Re-



Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009              [Page 16]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


                                     authentication Protocol (ERP)",
                                     RFC 5296, August 2008.

14.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.gaonkar-radext-erp-attrs]    Gaonkar, K., Dondeti, L.,
                                     Narayanan, V., and G. Zorn, "RADIUS
                                     Support for EAP Re-authentication
                                     Protocol",
                                     draft-gaonkar-radext-erp-attrs-03
                                     (work in progress), February 2008.

   [I-D.ietf-dime-app-design-guide]  Fajardo, V., Asveren, T.,
                                     Tschofenig, H., McGregor, G., and
                                     J. Loughney, "Diameter Applications
                                     Design Guidelines",
                                     draft-ietf-dime-app-design-guide-08
                                     (work in progress), November 2008.

   [I-D.ietf-dime-erp]               Dondeti, L., Bournelle, J., Morand,
                                     L., and S. Decugis, "Diameter
                                     Support for EAP Re-authentication
                                     Protocol", draft-ietf-dime-erp-00
                                     (work in progress), January 2009.

   [I-D.ietf-hokey-key-mgm]          Hoeper, K. and Y. Ohba,
                                     "Distribution of EAP based keys for
                                     handover and re-authentication",
                                     draft-ietf-hokey-key-mgm-06 (work
                                     in progress), April 2009.

   [I-D.wu-dime-local-keytran]       Wu, W., "Diameter support for local
                                     key transport protocol between
                                     local server and  home AAA server",
                                     draft-wu-dime-local-keytran-00
                                     (work in progress), May 2009.

   [RFC3748]                         Aboba, B., Blunk, L., Vollbrecht,
                                     J., Carlson, J., and H. Levkowetz,
                                     "Extensible Authentication Protocol
                                     (EAP)", RFC 3748, June 2004.

   [RFC4187]                         Arkko, J. and H. Haverinen,
                                     "Extensible Authentication Protocol
                                     Method for 3rd Generation
                                     Authentication and Key Agreement
                                     (EAP-AKA)", RFC 4187, January 2006.




Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009              [Page 17]


Internet-Draft            Diameter ERP support                 June 2009


   [RFC5247]                         Aboba, B., Simon, D., and P.
                                     Eronen, "Extensible Authentication
                                     Protocol (EAP) Key Management
                                     Framework", RFC 5247, August 2008.

URIs

   [1]  <http://www.iana.org/assignments/aaa-parameters/>

Author's Address

   Sebastien Decugis (editor)
   NICT
   4-2-1 Nukui-Kitamachi
   Koganei, Tokyo  184-8795
   JP

   EMail: sdecugis@nict.go.jp

































Decugis                 Expires December 10, 2009              [Page 18]