💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › rfc › rfc5192.gmi captured on 2024-08-19 at 02:08:05. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2022-01-08)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Keywords: [--------], dynamic host configuration protocol, pac, pana client
Network Working Group L. Morand
Request for Comments: 5192 France Telecom R&D
Category: Standards Track A. Yegin
Samsung
S. Kumar
Tech Mahindra Ltd
S. Madanapalli
Samsung
May 2008
DHCP Options for Protocol for Carrying Authentication for
Network Access (PANA) Authentication Agents
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.
Abstract
This document defines new DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 options that contain a
list of IP addresses to locate one or more PANA (Protocol for
carrying Authentication for Network Access) Authentication Agents
(PAAs). This is one of the methods that a PANA Client (PaC) can use
to locate PAAs.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Specification of Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4. PANA Authentication Agent DHCPv4 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. PANA Authentication Agent DHCPv6 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Morand, et al. Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 5192 PAA DHCP Options May 2008
1. Introduction
The Protocol for carrying Authentication for Network Access (PANA)
[RFC5191] defines a new Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP)
[RFC3748] lower layer that uses IP between the protocol end-points.
The PANA protocol is run between a PANA Client (PaC) and a PANA
Authentication Agent (PAA) in order to perform authentication and
authorization for the network access service.
This document specifies DHCPv4 [RFC2131] and DHCPv6 [RFC3315] options
that allow PANA clients (PaCs) to discover PANA Authentication Agents
(PAAs). This is one of the methods for locating PAAs.
The DHCP options defined in this document are used only as a PAA
discovery mechanism. These DHCP options MUST NOT be used to perform
any negotiation of the use of PANA between the PaC and a PAA.
2. Specification of Requirements
In this document, several words are used to signify the requirements
of the specification. These words are often capitalized. 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. Terminology
This document uses the DHCP terminology defined in [RFC2131],
[RFC2132], and [RFC3315].
This document uses the PANA terminology defined in [RFC5191]. In
particular, the following terms are defined:
PANA Client (PaC):
The client side of the protocol that resides in the access
device (e.g., laptop, PDA, etc.). It is responsible for
providing the credentials in order to prove its identity
(authentication) for network access authorization. The PaC and
the EAP peer are co-located in the same access device.
PANA Authentication Agent (PAA):
The protocol entity in the access network whose responsibility
it is to verify the credentials provided by a PANA client (PaC)
and authorize network access to the access device. The PAA and
Morand, et al. Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 5192 PAA DHCP Options May 2008
the EAP authenticator (and optionally the EAP server) are
colocated in the same node.
4. PANA Authentication Agent DHCPv4 Option
This DHCPv4 option carries a list of 32-bit (binary) IPv4 addresses
indicating PANA Authentication Agents (PAAs) available to the PANA
client (PaC).
The DHCPv4 option for PANA Authentication Agent has the format shown
in Figure 1.
0 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| option-code | option-length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+ PAA IPv4 Address +
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: PAA DHCPv4 option
option-code: OPTION_PANA_AGENT (136).
option-length: Length of the 'options' field in octets;
MUST be a multiple of four (4).
PAA IPv4 Address: IPv4 address of a PAA for the client to use.
The PAAs are listed in the order of preference
for use by the client.
A PaC (DHCPv4 client) SHOULD request the PAA DHCPv4 Option in a
Parameter Request List, as described in [RFC2131] and [RFC2132].
If configured with a (list of) PAA address(es), a DHCPv4 server
SHOULD send a client the PAA DHCPv4 option, even if this option is
not explicitly requested by the client.
A PaC (DHCPv4 client) receiving the PAA DHCPv4 option SHOULD use the
(list of) IP address(es) to locate PAA(s).
The PaC (DHCPv4 client) MUST try the records in the order listed in
the PAA DHCPv4 option received from the DHCPv4 server.
Morand, et al. Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 5192 PAA DHCP Options May 2008
5. PANA Authentication Agent DHCPv6 Option
This DHCPv6 option carries a list of 128-bit (binary) IPv6 addresses
indicating PANA Authentication Agents (PAAs) available to the PANA
client (PaC).
The DHCPv6 option for PANA Authentication Agent has the format shown
in Figure 2.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| option-code | option-length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+ +
| |
+ PAA IPv6 Address +
| |
+ +
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| .... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: PAA DHCPv6 option
option-code: OPTION_PANA_AGENT (40).
option-length: Length of the 'options' field in octets;
MUST be a multiple of sixteen (16).
PAA IPv6 Address: IPv6 address of a PAA for the client to use.
The PAAs are listed in the order of preference
for use by the client.
A PaC DHCPv6 client SHOULD request the PAA DHCPv6 option in an
Options Request Option (ORO) as described in the DHCPv6 specification
[RFC3315].
If configured with a (list of) PAA address(es), a DHCPv6 server
SHOULD send a client the PAA DHCPv6 option, even if this option is
not explicitly requested by the client.
A PaC (DHCPv6 client) receiving the PAA DHCPv6 option SHOULD use the
(list of) IP address(es) to locate PAA(s).
The PaC (DHCPv6 client) MUST try the records in the order listed in
the PAA DHCPv6 option received from the DHCPv6 server.
Morand, et al. Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 5192 PAA DHCP Options May 2008
6. IANA Considerations
The following DHCPv4 option code for PANA Authentication Agent
options has been assigned by IANA:
Option Name Value Described in
-----------------------------------------------
OPTION_PANA_AGENT 136 Section 4
The following DHCPv6 option code for PANA Authentication Agent
options has been assigned by IANA:
Option Name Value Described in
------------------------------------------------
OPTION_PANA_AGENT 40 Section 5
7. Security Considerations
The security considerations in [RFC2131], [RFC2132], and [RFC3315]
apply. If an adversary manages to modify the response from a DHCP
server or insert its own response, a PANA Client could be led to
contact a rogue PANA Authentication Agent, possibly one that then
intercepts authentication requests and/or denies network access to
the access device.
In most networks, the DHCP exchange that delivers the options prior
to network access authentication is neither integrity protected nor
origin authenticated. Therefore, the options defined in this
document MUST NOT be used to perform any negotiation on the use of
PANA between the PANA Client and a PANA Authentication Agent. Using
the presence (or absence) of these DHCP options as an indication of
network mandating PANA authentication (or not) is an example of such
a negotiation mechanism. This negotiation would allow bidding-down
attacks by making the clients choose to use a lower-grade security
mechanism (or even no security at all).
8. Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Ralph Droms, Stig Venaas, Ted Lemon, Andre
Kostur and Bernie Volz for their valuable comments. We would also
like to thank Jari Arkko, Thomas Narten and Bernard Aboba that
provided several reviews, as well as all members of the PANA and DHC
working groups that contribute to improve this document.
Morand, et al. Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 5192 PAA DHCP Options May 2008
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2131] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol",
RFC 2131, March 1997.
[RFC2132] Alexander, S. and R. Droms, "DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor
Extensions", RFC 2132, March 1997.
[RFC3315] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C.,
and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for
IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003.
[RFC5191] Forsberg, D., Ohba, Y., Patil, B., Tschofenig, H., and A.
Yegin, "Protocol for Carrying Authentication for Network
Access (PANA)", RFC 5191, May 2008.
9.2. Informative References
[RFC3748] Aboba, B., Blunk, L., Vollbrecht, J., Carlson, J., and H.
Levkowetz, "Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP)",
RFC 3748, June 2004.
Morand, et al. Standards Track [Page 6]
RFC 5192 PAA DHCP Options May 2008
Authors' Addresses
Lionel Morand
France Telecom R&D
EMail: lionel.morand@orange-ftgroup.com
Alper E. Yegin
Samsung
EMail: a.yegin@partner.samsung.com
Suraj Kumar
Tech Mahindra Ltd
EMail: surajk@techmahindra.com
Syam Madanapalli
Samsung
EMail: syam@samsung.com
Morand, et al. Standards Track [Page 7]
RFC 5192 PAA DHCP Options May 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.
Morand, et al. Standards Track [Page 8]