RADIUS Filter Rule Attribute
RFC 4849

Network Working Group                                         P. Congdon
Request for Comments: 4849                                    M. Sanchez
Category: Standards Track                      ProCurve Networking by HP
                                                                B. Aboba
                                                   Microsoft Corporation
                                                              April 2007

                      RADIUS Filter Rule Attribute

Status of This Memo

   This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
   Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
   improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
   Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
   and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

Abstract

   While RFC 2865 defines the Filter-Id attribute, it requires that the
   Network Access Server (NAS) be pre-populated with the desired
   filters.  However, in situations where the server operator does not
   know which filters have been pre-populated, it is useful to specify
   filter rules explicitly.  This document defines the NAS-Filter-Rule
   attribute within the Remote Authentication Dial In User Service
   (RADIUS).  This attribute is based on the Diameter NAS-Filter-Rule
   Attribute Value Pair (AVP) described in RFC 4005, and the
   IPFilterRule syntax defined in RFC 3588.

Congdon, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 1]
RFC 4849                 Filter Rule Attribute                April 2007

Table of Contents

   1. Introduction ....................................................2
      1.1. Terminology ................................................2
      1.2. Requirements Language ......................................3
      1.3. Attribute Interpretation ...................................3
   2. NAS-Filter-Rule Attribute .......................................3
   3. Table of Attributes .............................................5
   4. Diameter Considerations .........................................5
   5. IANA Considerations .............................................6
   6. Security Considerations .........................................6
   7. References ......................................................7
      7.1. Normative References .......................................7
      7.2. Informative References .....................................7
   8. Acknowledgments .................................................7

1.  Introduction

   This document defines the NAS-Filter-Rule attribute within the Remote
   Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS).  This attribute has the
   same functionality as the Diameter NAS-Filter-Rule AVP (400) defined
   in [RFC4005], Section 6.6, and the same syntax as an IPFilterRule
   defined in [RFC3588], Section 4.3.  This attribute may prove useful
   for provisioning of filter rules.

   While [RFC2865], Section 5.11, defines the Filter-Id attribute (11),
   it requires that the Network Access Server (NAS) be pre-populated
   with the desired filters.  However, in situations where the server
   operator does not know which filters have been pre-populated, it is
   useful to specify filter rules explicitly.

1.1.  Terminology

   This document uses the following terms:

   Network Access Server (NAS)
      A device that provides an access service for a user to a network.

   RADIUS server
      A RADIUS authentication server is an entity that provides an
      authentication service to a NAS.

   RADIUS proxy
      A RADIUS proxy acts as an authentication server to the NAS, and a
      RADIUS client to the RADIUS server.

Congdon, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 2]
RFC 4849                 Filter Rule Attribute                April 2007

1.2.  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].

1.3.  Attribute Interpretation

   If a NAS conforming to this specification receives an Access-Accept
   packet containing a NAS-Filter-Rule attribute that it cannot apply,
   it MUST act as though it had received an Access-Reject.  [RFC3576]
   requires that a NAS receiving a Change of Authorization Request
   (CoA-Request) reply with a CoA-NAK if the Request contains an
   unsupported attribute.  It is RECOMMENDED that an Error-Cause
   attribute with value set to "Unsupported Attribute" (401) be included
   in the CoA-NAK.  As noted in [RFC3576], authorization changes are
   atomic so that this situation does not result in session termination,
   and the pre-existing configuration remains unchanged.  As a result,
   no accounting packets should be generated because of the CoA-Request.

2.  NAS-Filter-Rule Attribute

   Description

   This attribute indicates filter rules to be applied for this user.
   Zero or more NAS-Filter-Rule attributes MAY be sent in Access-Accept,
   CoA-Request, or Accounting-Request packets.

   The NAS-Filter-Rule attribute is not intended to be used concurrently
   with any other filter rule attribute, including Filter-Id (11) and
   NAS-Traffic-Rule [Traffic] attributes.  NAS-Filter-Rule and NAS-
   Traffic-Rule attributes MUST NOT appear in the same RADIUS packet.
   If a NAS-Traffic-Rule attribute is present, a NAS implementing this
   specification MUST silently discard any NAS-Filter-Rule attributes
   that are present.  Filter-Id and NAS-Filter-Rule attributes SHOULD
   NOT appear in the same RADIUS packet.  Given the absence in [RFC4005]
   of well-defined precedence rules for combining Filter-Id and NAS-
   Filter-Rule attributes into a single rule set, the behavior of NASes
   receiving both attributes is undefined, and therefore a RADIUS server
   implementation cannot assume a consistent behavior.

   Where multiple NAS-Filter-Rule attributes are included in a RADIUS
   packet, the String field of the attributes are to be concatenated to
   form a set of filter rules.  As noted in [RFC2865], Section 2.3, "the
   forwarding server MUST NOT change the order of any attributes of the
   same type", so that RADIUS proxies will not reorder NAS-Filter-Rule
   attributes.

Congdon, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 3]
RFC 4849                 Filter Rule Attribute                April 2007

   A summary of the NAS-Filter-Rule Attribute format is shown below.
   The fields are transmitted from left to right.

    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     |      String...
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type

      92

   Length

      >=3

   String

      The String field is one or more octets.  It contains filter rules
      in the IPFilterRule syntax defined in [RFC3588], Section 4.3, with
      individual filter rules separated by a NUL (0x00).  A NAS-Filter-
      Rule attribute may contain a partial rule, one rule, or more than
      one rule.  Filter rules may be continued across attribute
      boundaries, so implementations cannot assume that individual
      filter rules begin or end on attribute boundaries.

      The set of NAS-Filter-Rule attributes SHOULD be created by
      concatenating the individual filter rules, separated by a NUL
      (0x00) octet.  The resulting data should be split on 253-octet
      boundaries to obtain a set of NAS-Filter-Rule attributes.  On
      reception, the individual filter rules are determined by
      concatenating the contents of all NAS-Filter-Rule attributes, and
      then splitting individual filter rules with the NUL octet (0x00)
      as a delimiter.

Congdon, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 4]
RFC 4849                 Filter Rule Attribute                April 2007

3.  Table of Attributes

   The following table provides a guide to which attributes may be found
   in which kinds of packets, and in what quantity.

   Access- Access- Access- Access-   CoA-  Acct-
   Request Accept  Reject  Challenge Req   Req   #   Attribute
    0       0+      0       0        0+    0+    92  NAS-Filter-Rule

   The following table defines the meaning of the above table entries.

     0     This attribute MUST NOT be present in the packet.
     0+    Zero or more instances of this attribute MAY be
           present in the packet.
     0-1   Zero or one instance of this attribute MAY be
           present in the packet.

4.  Diameter Considerations

   [RFC4005], Section 6.6, defines the NAS-Filter-Rule AVP (400) with
   the same functionality as the RADIUS NAS-Filter-Rule attribute.  In
   order to support interoperability, Diameter/RADIUS gateways will need
   to be configured to translate RADIUS attribute 92 to Diameter NAS-
   Filter-Rule AVP (400) and vice versa.

   When translating Diameter NAS-Filter-Rule AVPs to RADIUS NAS-Filter-
   Rule attributes, the set of NAS-Filter-Rule attributes is created by
   concatenating the individual filter rules, separated by a NUL octet.
   The resulting data SHOULD then be split on 253-octet boundaries.

   When translating RADIUS NAS-Filter-Rule attributes to Diameter NAS-
   Filter-Rule AVPs, the individual rules are determined by
   concatenating the contents of all NAS-Filter-Rule attributes, and
   then splitting individual filter rules with the NUL octet as a
   delimiter.  Each rule is then encoded as a single Diameter NAS-
   Filter-Rule AVP.

   Note that a translated Diameter message can be larger than the
   maximum RADIUS packet size (4096 bytes).  Where a Diameter/RADIUS
   gateway receives a Diameter message containing a NAS-Filter-Rule AVP
   that is too large to fit into a RADIUS packet, the Diameter/RADIUS
   gateway will respond to the originating Diameter peer with a Result-
   Code AVP with the value DIAMETER_RADIUS_AVP_UNTRANSLATABLE (5018),
   and with a Failed-AVP AVP containing the NAS-Filter-Rule AVP.  Since
   repairing the error will probably require re-working the filter
   rules, the originating peer should treat the combination of a
   Result-Code AVP with value DIAMETER_RADIUS_AVP_UNTRANSLATABLE and a
   Failed-AVP AVP containing a NAS-Filter-Rule AVP as a terminal error.

Congdon, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 5]
RFC 4849                 Filter Rule Attribute                April 2007

5.  IANA Considerations

   This specification does not create any new registries.

   This document uses the RADIUS [RFC2865] namespace, see
   <http://www.iana.org/assignments/radius-types>.  One value has been
   allocated in the section "RADIUS Attribute Types".  The RADIUS
   attribute for which a value has been assigned is:

      92 - NAS-Filter-Rule

   This document also utilizes the Diameter [RFC3588] namespace.  A
   Diameter Result-Code AVP value for the
   DIAMETER_RADIUS_AVP_UNTRANSLATABLE error has been allocated.  Since
   this is a permanent failure, the allocation (5018) is in the 5xxx
   range.

6.  Security Considerations

   This specification describes the use of RADIUS for purposes of
   authentication, authorization and accounting.  Threats and security
   issues for this application are described in [RFC3579] and [RFC3580];
   security issues encountered in roaming are described in [RFC2607].

   This document specifies a new attribute that can be included in
   existing RADIUS packets, which are protected as described in
   [RFC3579] and [RFC3576].  See those documents for a more detailed
   description.

   The security mechanisms supported in RADIUS and Diameter are focused
   on preventing an attacker from spoofing packets or modifying packets
   in transit.  They do not prevent an authorized RADIUS/Diameter server
   or proxy from modifying, inserting, or removing attributes with
   malicious intent.  Filter attributes modified or removed by a
   RADIUS/Diameter proxy may enable a user to obtain network access
   without the appropriate filters; if the proxy were also to modify
   accounting packets, then the modification would not be reflected in
   the accounting server logs.

   Since the RADIUS protocol currently does not support capability
   negotiation, a RADIUS server cannot automatically discover whether a
   NAS supports the NAS-Filter-Rule attribute.  A legacy NAS not
   compliant with this specification may silently discard the NAS-
   Filter-Rule attribute while permitting the user to access the
   network.  This can cause users to improperly receive unfiltered
   access to the network.  As a result, the NAS-Filter-Rule attribute
   SHOULD only be sent to a NAS that is known to support it.

Congdon, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 6]
RFC 4849                 Filter Rule Attribute                April 2007

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.

   [RFC2865] Rigney, C., Willens, S., Rubens, A., and W. Simpson,
             "Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", RFC
             2865, June 2000.

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

   [RFC4005] Calhoun, P., Zorn, G., Spence, D., and D. Mitton, "Diameter
             Network Access Server Application", RFC 4005, August 2005.

7.2.  Informative References

   [RFC2607] Aboba, B. and J. Vollbrecht, "Proxy Chaining and Policy
             Implementation in Roaming", RFC 2607, June 1999.

   [RFC3576] Chiba, M., Dommety, G., Eklund, M., Mitton, D., and B.
             Aboba, "Dynamic Authorization Extensions to Remote
             Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", RFC 3576,
             July 2003.

   [RFC3579] Aboba, B. and P. Calhoun, "RADIUS (Remote Authentication
             Dial In User Service) Support For Extensible Authentication
             Protocol (EAP)", RFC 3579, September 2003.

   [RFC3580] Congdon, P., Aboba, B., Smith, A., Zorn, G., and J. Roese,
             "IEEE 802.1X Remote Authentication Dial In User Service
             (RADIUS) Usage Guidelines", RFC 3580, September 2003.

   [Traffic] Congdon, P., Sanchez, M., Lior, A., Adrangi, F., and B.
             Aboba, "RADIUS Attributes for Filtering and Redirection",
             Work in Progress, March 2007.

8.  Acknowledgments

   The authors would like to acknowledge Emile Bergen, Alan DeKok, Greg
   Weber, Glen Zorn, Pasi Eronen, David Mitton, and David Nelson for
   contributions to this document.

Congdon, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 7]
RFC 4849                 Filter Rule Attribute                April 2007

Authors' Addresses

   Paul Congdon
   Hewlett Packard Company
   ProCurve Networking by HP
   8000 Foothills Blvd, M/S 5662
   Roseville, CA  95747

   EMail: paul.congdon@hp.com
   Phone: +1 916 785 5753
   Fax:   +1 916 785 8478

   Mauricio Sanchez
   Hewlett Packard Company
   ProCurve Networking by HP
   8000 Foothills Blvd, M/S 5559
   Roseville, CA  95747

   EMail: mauricio.sanchez@hp.com
   Phone: +1 916 785 1910
   Fax:   +1 916 785 1815

   Bernard Aboba
   Microsoft Corporation
   One Microsoft Way
   Redmond, WA 98052

   EMail: bernarda@microsoft.com
   Phone: +1 425 706 6605
   Fax:   +1 425 936 7329

Congdon, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 8]
RFC 4849                 Filter Rule Attribute                April 2007

Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

   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.

Acknowledgement

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

Congdon, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 9]