[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp

Network Working Group                                        C. Holmberg
Internet-Draft                                                  Ericsson
Intended status: Standards Track                              R. Shpount
Expires: December 17, 2015                                   TurboBridge
                                                           June 15, 2015


  DTLS Association Establishment Using the SDP Offer/Answer Mechanism
                 draft-holmberg-mmusic-sdp-dtls-00.txt

Abstract

   This draft defines the criteria for when a DTLS association needs to
   be established/re-established, based on an SDP offer/answer
   transaction.  The draft also defines how the SDP 'connection'
   attribute is used with DTLS to signal to the remote peer whether a
   new DTLS association needs to established/re-established.

Status of This Memo

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

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   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."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on December 17, 2015.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2015 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
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of




Holmberg & Shpount      Expires December 17, 2015               [Page 1]


Internet-DraDTLS Association Establishment Using the SDP Offe  June 2015


   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   4.  DTLS Association Re-Establishment Criteria  . . . . . . . . .   3
     4.1.  General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     4.2.  Change of DTLS Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     4.3.  Change of Fingerprint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     4.4.  ICE Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     4.5.  SIP Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  SDP Connection Attribute for DTLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     5.1.  General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  SDP Offer/Answer Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     6.1.  General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     6.2.  Generating the Initial SDP Offer  . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     6.3.  Generating the Answer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     6.4.  Offerer Processing of the SDP Answer  . . . . . . . . . .   6
     6.5.  Modifying the Session . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   7.  RFC Updates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   9.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   10. Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   11. Change Log  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   12. Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7

1.  Introduction

   This draft defines the criteria for when a DTLS association needs to
   be established/re-established, based on an SDP offer/answer
   transaction.  The draft also defines how the SDP 'connection'
   attribute is used with DTLS to signal to the remote peer whether a
   new DTLS association needs to established/re-established.

2.  Abbreviations

   TBD

3.  Conventions

   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].




Holmberg & Shpount      Expires December 17, 2015               [Page 2]


Internet-DraDTLS Association Establishment Using the SDP Offe  June 2015


4.  DTLS Association Re-Establishment Criteria

4.1.  General

   If an endpoint changes the local transport parameters associated with
   a DTLS association, the endpoint MUST create a new DTLS association.
   Section 6 defines the SDP Offer/Answer procedures [RFC3264]
   associated with that.

   NOTE: As described in Section 4.4, when Interactive Connectivity
   Establishment (ICE) [RFC5245] is used there are specific scenarios
   where the change of transport parameters do not trigger a re-
   establishment of the DTLS association.

   This section describes other events that require re-establishment of
   a DTLS association.  If such event occur, the endpoint MUST also
   change the local transport parameters.  An endpoint MUST NOT re-
   establish a DTLS association without also changing the local
   transport parameters, event if the trigger as such for the re-
   establishment is not a change of the local transport parameters.

   NOTE: In future, if new events that require re-establishment of a
   DTLS association are found, this section should be updated to cover
   those events.

4.2.  Change of DTLS Role

   [RFC5763] defines how the DTLS roles are negotiated using an offer/
   answer transaction.  If DTLS roles associated with the DTLS
   association have previously been negotiated, and a subsequent offer/
   answer transaction changes the roles, the DTLS association MUST be
   re-established.

4.3.  Change of Fingerprint

   If the certificate fingerprint [REF-TO-BE-ADDED] associated with the
   DTLS association changes, the DTLS association MUST be re-
   established.

4.4.  ICE Considerations

   If Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) [RFC5245] is used,
   the re-establishment of a DTLS association requires the ICE session
   to be re-established.  Similarly, the re-establishment of an ICE
   session requires re-establishment of the DTLS association.

   When an endpoint wants to re-establish the ICE session, if follows
   the procedures in [RFC5245].  When the endpoint collects the new set



Holmberg & Shpount      Expires December 17, 2015               [Page 3]


Internet-DraDTLS Association Establishment Using the SDP Offe  June 2015


   of ICE candidates, the host candidate(s) MUST be different from the
   previously used host candidates.

   An ICE restart [RFC5245] does not require re-establishment of the
   DTLS association and the ICE session, even if new host candidates
   might be taken into use due to the restart.

   Note that, as defined in [RFC5763], each ICE candidate associated
   with a component is treated as being part of the same DTLS
   association.  Therefore, from a DTLS perspective it is not considered
   a change of local transport parameters when endpoints switch between
   those ICE candidates, and hence such switch will not trigger re-
   establishment of the DTLS association.

   NOTE: The procedures defined in [RFC5763] are defined for SRTP-DTLS
   [RFC5763].  However, this document refer the the procedures for
   general usage with DTLS.

4.5.  SIP Considerations

   When the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) [RFC3261] is used as the
   signal protocol for establishing a multimedia session, dialogs
   [RFC3261] might be established between the caller and multiple
   callees.  This is referred to as forking.  If forking occurs,
   separate DTLS associations MUST be established between the caller and
   each callee.

5.  SDP Connection Attribute for DTLS

5.1.  General

   The SDP 'connection' attribute was originally defined for connection-
   oriented protocols, e.g.  TCP and TLS.  This section defines how the
   attribute is used with DTLS.

   A 'connection' attribute value of 'new' indicates that a new DTLS
   association MUST be established.  A 'connection' attribute value of
   'existing' indicates that the existing DTLS association MUST be used.

   When used with DTLS, there is no default value defined for the
   attribute.  Implementations that wish to use the attribute MUST
   explicitly include it in SDP offers and answers.  If an offer or
   answer does not contain an attribute, other means needs to be used in
   order for endpoints to determine whether an offer or answer is
   associated with an event that requires the DTLS association to be re-
   established.





Holmberg & Shpount      Expires December 17, 2015               [Page 4]


Internet-DraDTLS Association Establishment Using the SDP Offe  June 2015


6.  SDP Offer/Answer Procedures

6.1.  General

   This section defines the SDP offer/answer procedures for using the
   SDP 'connection' attribute for DTLS.  The section also describes how
   the usage of the SDP 'setup' attribute and the SDP 'fingerprint'
   attribute [RFC4572] is affected.

6.2.  Generating the Initial SDP Offer

   When the offerer sends the initial offer, and the offerer wants to
   establish a DTLS association, it MUST insert an SDP 'connection'
   attribute with a 'new' value to the offer.  In addition, the offerer
   MUST insert an SDP 'setup' attribute according to the procedures in
   [RFC4572], and an SDP 'fingerprint' attribute according to the
   procedures in [RFC4572], in the offer.

6.3.  Generating the Answer

   If an answerer receives an offer that contains an SDP 'connection'
   attribute with a 'new' value, the answerer MUST insert a 'new' value
   in the associated answer.  The same applies if the answerer receives
   an offer that contains an SDP 'connection' attribute with a 'new'
   value, but the answerer determines (based on local events) that the
   DTLS association is to be re-established.  In addition, the answerer
   MUSTbinsert an SDP 'setup' attribute according to the procedures in
   [RFC4572], and an SDP 'fingerprint' attribute according to the
   procedures in [RFC4572], in the answer.

   If the answerer does not accept the establishment (or re-
   establishment) of the DTLS association, it MUST reject the offer
   [RFC3264].

   If an answerer receives an offer that contains a 'connection'
   attribute with an 'existing' value, and if the answerer determines
   that the DTLS association does not need to be re-established, it MUST
   insert an 'existing' value in the associated answer.  In addition,
   the answerer MUST insert an SDP 'setup' attribute with a value that
   does not change the previously negotiated DTLS roles, and an SDP
   'fingerprint' attribute with a value that does not change the
   fingerprint, in the answer.

   If the answerer receives an offer that does not contain an SDP
   'connection' attribute, the answerer MUST NOT insert a 'connection'
   attribute in the answer.





Holmberg & Shpount      Expires December 17, 2015               [Page 5]


Internet-DraDTLS Association Establishment Using the SDP Offe  June 2015


   If the DTLS association is to be established (or re-established), and
   if the answerer becomes DTLS client, the answerer MUST initiate the
   procedures for establishing/re-establishing the DTLS association.  If
   the answerer becomes DTLS server, it waits for the offerer to
   establish (or re-establish) the DTLS association.

6.4.  Offerer Processing of the SDP Answer

   When an offerer receives an answer that contains an SDP 'connection'
   attribute with a 'new' value, and if the offerer becomes DTLS client,
   the offerer MUST establish/re-establish the DTLS association.  If the
   offerer becomes DTLS server, it waits for the answerer to establish/
   re-establish the DTLS association.

   If the answer contains an SDP 'connection' attribute with an
   'existing' value, the offerer will continue using the previously
   established DTLS association.  It is considered an error case if the
   answer contains a 'connection' attribute with an 'existing' value,
   and a DTLS association does not exist.

6.5.  Modifying the Session

   When the offerer sends a subsequent offer, and a previously
   established DTLS association is to be established (or re-
   established), the offerer MUST insert an SDP 'connection' attribute
   with a 'new' value in the offer.  In addition, the offerer MUST
   insert an SDP 'setup' attribute according to the procedures in
   [RFC4572], and an SDP 'fingerprint' attribute according to the
   procedures in [RFC4572], in the offer.

   When the offerer sends a subsequent offer, and the DTLS association
   is not to be established (or re-established), the offerer MUST insert
   an SDP 'connection' attribute with an 'existing' value in the offer.
   In addition, the offerer MUST insert an SDP 'setup' attribute with a
   value that does not change the previously negotiated DTLS roles, and
   an SDP 'fingerprint' attribute with a value that does not change the
   fingerprint, in the offer.

7.  RFC Updates

   Here we will add the RFC updates that are needed.

8.  Security Considerations

   TBD






Holmberg & Shpount      Expires December 17, 2015               [Page 6]


Internet-DraDTLS Association Establishment Using the SDP Offe  June 2015


9.  IANA Considerations

   TBD

10.  Acknowledgements

   TBD

11.  Change Log

   [RFC EDITOR NOTE: Please remove this section when publishing]

12.  Normative References

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

   [RFC3261]  Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
              A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
              Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
              June 2002.

   [RFC3264]  Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model
              with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, June
              2002.

   [RFC4572]  Lennox, J., "Connection-Oriented Media Transport over the
              Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol in the Session
              Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 4572, July 2006.

   [RFC5245]  Rosenberg, J., "Interactive Connectivity Establishment
              (ICE): A Protocol for Network Address Translator (NAT)
              Traversal for Offer/Answer Protocols", RFC 5245, April
              2010.

   [RFC5763]  Fischl, J., Tschofenig, H., and E. Rescorla, "Framework
              for Establishing a Secure Real-time Transport Protocol
              (SRTP) Security Context Using Datagram Transport Layer
              Security (DTLS)", RFC 5763, May 2010.

Authors' Addresses










Holmberg & Shpount      Expires December 17, 2015               [Page 7]


Internet-DraDTLS Association Establishment Using the SDP Offe  June 2015


   Christer Holmberg
   Ericsson
   Hirsalantie 11
   Jorvas  02420
   Finland

   Email: christer.holmberg@ericsson.com


   Roman Shpount
   TurboBridge
   4905 Del Ray Avenue, Suite 300
   Bethesda, MD  20814
   USA

   Phone: +1 (240) 292-6632
   Email: rshpount@turbobridge.com


































Holmberg & Shpount      Expires December 17, 2015               [Page 8]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129b, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/