[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01

Host Identity Protocol                                    R. Hummen, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                                  M. Henze
Intended status: Experimental                                  J. Hiller
Expires: July 13, 2013                           RWTH Aachen University,
                                           Communication and Distributed
                                                           Systems Group
                                                        January 09, 2013


       HIP Middlebox Puzzle Offloading and End-host Notification
                   draft-hummen-hip-middle-puzzle-01

Abstract

   The Host Identity Protocol [RFC5201] is a secure signaling protocol
   with a cryptographic namespace.  It provides the communicating peers
   with a cryptographic puzzle mechanism to protect against Denial of
   Service (DoS) attacks exploiting the computation and memory overheads
   of the protocol exchange.  This document specifies an extension of
   the protocol that enables an on-path network entity to assist in the
   choice of the puzzle difficulty in case of an attack.  Furthermore,
   it defines a modification of the puzzle mechanism that enables a host
   to delegate puzzle solving to an on-path network entity.

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].

Notation


   {x}         indicates that x is signed.

   Initiator   is the host that initiates a HIP association
               (cf. HIP base protocol).

   Responder   is the host that responds to the Initiator
               (cf. HIP base protocol).

   -->         signifies "Initiator to Responder" communication.

   <--         signifies "Responder to Initiator" communication.


Status of this Memo




Hummen, et al.            Expires July 13, 2013                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft              Hip-Middle-Puzzle               January 2013


   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 July 13, 2013.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2013 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
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.






















Hummen, et al.            Expires July 13, 2013                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft              Hip-Middle-Puzzle               January 2013


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   2.  Considerations concerning the HIP puzzle . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     2.1.  Resource-constrained Initiator . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     2.2.  Resource-constrained Responder . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   3.  Protocol Overview  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     3.1.  Assisting Resource-constrained Initiators  . . . . . . . .  6
     3.2.  Assisting Resource-constrained Responders  . . . . . . . .  7
   4.  HIP Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     4.1.  HOST_OFFLOADING_SUPPORT  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     4.2.  MIDDLEBOX_OFFLOADING_SUPPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     4.3.  OFFLOADED_SOLUTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     4.4.  VIA_UNTRUSTED_NETWORK  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   5.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   6.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   7.  Changelog  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
     7.1.  Version 1  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
     7.2.  Version 0  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   8.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12






























Hummen, et al.            Expires July 13, 2013                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft              Hip-Middle-Puzzle               January 2013


1.  Introduction

   The Host Identity Protocol (HIP) [RFC5201] is a secure signaling
   protocol that introduces a cryptographic namespace for the
   identification and authentication of the communicating peers.  As the
   protocol employs computationally expensive public-key-based
   operations in the protocol exchange, HIP provides the communicating
   peers with mechanisms to protect against Denial of Service (DoS)
   attacks targeting its computation and memory overheads.
   Specifically, the Responder in the protocol handshake may require the
   Initiator to solve a cryptographic puzzle with a dynamically
   adjustable difficulty.  The puzzle enables the Responder to require a
   commitment of resources from the Initiator before performing
   computationally expensive operations and setting up association
   state.

   While such a protection mechanism is generally desirable for
   protocols involving computationally expensive operations, the correct
   choice of the puzzle difficulty is hard.  This is especially true in
   communication scenarios where the resources of the communicating
   peers are highly diverse.  An example for such a scenario is a
   resource-constrained sensor node communicating with a comparably
   powerful modern desktop computer.

   This document specifies an extension of the HIP signaling channel
   that enables on-path network entities (i.e., middleboxes [RFC3234])
   to participate in the handshake between two hosts in order to assist
   either in the choice of the puzzle difficulty or in solving the
   puzzle.  To this end, the extension introduces additional signaling
   between hosts and middleboxes that are located on the communication
   path.  The corresponding message exchanges and the newly introduced
   parameters are described in this document.  Note, however, that the
   recommendation of specific puzzle difficulties is out-of-scope for
   this document as these are highly scenario and situation dependent.


2.  Considerations concerning the HIP puzzle

   The cryptographic puzzle mechanism used in HIP allows the responder
   to protect against maliciously induced computations as well as memory
   exhaustion.  In a scenario with low or medium load, the Responder
   should set the puzzle difficulty K to 0.  As a result, any value is a
   correct solution for the puzzle.  Hence, the Initiator does not need
   to commit resources into solving the puzzle to continue the HIP
   handshake.  However, when the Responder is under high load (e.g., due
   to an on-going attack), it may increase the puzzle difficulty K. The
   exact value of K should depend on the available resources of the
   Initiator in order to prevent the use of undemanding or excessively



Hummen, et al.            Expires July 13, 2013                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft              Hip-Middle-Puzzle               January 2013


   hard puzzles.  However, IP addresses, HITs, and cipher suites that
   are known to the Responder when setting the puzzle difficulty do not
   suffice to make this information available to the Responder.

        +--------------+---------------+--------------------------+
        | Difficulty K | MSP430 16 MHz | Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4 GHz |
        +--------------+---------------+--------------------------+
        |       5      |    0.15 sec   |         0.001 sec        |
        |      10      |    4.92 sec   |         0.02 sec         |
        |      15      |   127.06 sec  |         0.45 sec         |
        |      20      |  4253.08 sec  |         14.90 sec        |
        +--------------+---------------+--------------------------+

      Table 1: Average time for solving puzzles with difficulty K for
   sensor-class (MSP430) and desktop-class (Core 2 Duo) devices over 50
                               measurements

   Table 1 shows that high values of K (e.g., K = 20) require an
   excessive number of computations for sensor-class devices, while low
   puzzle difficulties (e.g., K = 5) only provide negligible protection
   against modern desktop-class attackers.  This observation results in
   the following two obstacles when using a puzzle to protect the
   Responder against DoS attacks.

2.1.  Resource-constrained Initiator

   Assume a scenario where a resource-constrained device initiates a new
   handshake with an (Internet-connected) desktop-class Responder that
   is currently under high load (e.g., due to an attack).  In the
   optimal case (i.e., without NATs), the Responder learns the IP
   address of the Initiator, its HIT, and the DH_GROUP_LIST.  However,
   the provided information does not allow the Responder to deduce
   whether it is communicating with a resource-constrained or a
   comparably powerful device.  Hence, the Responder has to guess the
   class of the Initiator and set the puzzle difficulty accordingly.  If
   the Responder sets the puzzle difficulty for a desktop-class device,
   the puzzle is most likely unsolvable for sensor-class devices.
   Likewise, if the Responder assumes a sensor-class device, the puzzle
   does not protect against DoS attacks from a desktop-class device.  As
   the latter choice negates the use of the puzzle mechanism, the
   Responder should always set the difficulty such that it protects
   against attacks from computationally powerful peer hosts.

   In order to enable communication with a resource-constrained device
   despite the use of high puzzle difficulties, this document proposes a
   mechanism that allows resource-constrained Initiators to offload
   solving of the puzzle to on-path middleboxes.




Hummen, et al.            Expires July 13, 2013                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft              Hip-Middle-Puzzle               January 2013


2.2.  Resource-constrained Responder

   Assume a scenario where resource-constrained devices primarily
   communicate with each other.  However, at the same time, they are
   directly accessible from the Internet via gateway nodes.  An example
   for such a network topology may be a 6LowPAN-enabled sensor network
   that is equipped with a 6LBR (see Section 1.2 in
   [I-D.ietf-6lowpan-nd]).

   If a HIP-enabled device initiates a new connection with a resource-
   constrained device that is currently under high load (e.g., due to an
   attack), the resource-constrained Responder cannot identify the
   capabilities of the peer similarly to the case described above.
   Hence, the Responder does not protect itself against malicious
   Internet hosts, if it sets a puzzle difficulty that is suitable for
   sensor-class devices.  Contrarily, if it sets the puzzle difficulty
   too high, this prevents connections from benign sensor-class devices.

   To allow communication with other legitimate resource-constrained
   devices, the resource-constrained Responder should use puzzle
   difficulties targeting other resource-constrained devices.  However,
   to still protect against malicious desktop-class devices, this
   document introduces a mechanism that enables the on-path gateway to
   signal the Responder that traffic is routed via an untrusted network.
   This enables the Responder to set higher puzzle difficulties in case
   of communication where the capabilities of the peer host are
   uncertain.


3.  Protocol Overview

   This section gives an overview of the interaction between hosts and
   middleboxes that assist resource-constrained hosts in using the HIP
   puzzle mechanism.  Specifically, this document describes how
   resource-constrained Initiators can offload solving of a puzzle to an
   on-path middlebox and how a middleboxes can signal resource-
   constrained Responders to set the puzzle difficulty for Internet
   hosts.

3.1.  Assisting Resource-constrained Initiators

   A resource-constrained Initiator may receive a puzzle that would
   require excessive computations.  If energy, time, or availability
   constraints do not allow the Initiator to solve the puzzle itself, it
   can offload its computation to on-path middleboxes.

   As puzzle offloading requires changes to the SOLUTION parameter, the
   offloading Initiator, the computing middlebox, and the verifying



Hummen, et al.            Expires July 13, 2013                 [Page 6]


Internet-Draft              Hip-Middle-Puzzle               January 2013


   Responder are required to support the extension described in this
   documents.  Hence, end host (EOS) and middlebox puzzle offloading
   support (MOS) are negotiated in the R1 packet (see Figure 1).  As a
   result of the negotiation, the Initiator learns if the puzzle
   offloading extension described in this document can be used when
   processing the received R1 packet.

    Initiator               Middlebox                        Responder
                       .-----------------.
     I1                | Add MOS         | I1
    -----------------> |                 |---------------------------->
                       |                 |
     R1, EOS + MOS     | Add MOS         | R1, + EOS
    <----------------- |                 |<----------------------------
                       |                 |
     I2, + OS          | Solve Puzzle    | I2, OS
    -----------------> | Add Solution    |---------------------------->
                       |                 |
     R2                |                 | R2
    <----------------- |                 |<----------------------------
                       '-----------------'

    EOS: End-host Offloading Support
    MOS: Middlebox Offloading Support
    OS: Offloaded Solution

                                 Figure 1

   In the I2 packet, the OFFLOADED_SOLUTION replaces the SOLUTION
   parameter (see Figure 1).  The OFFLOADED_SOLUTION has got the same
   parameter layout as the original SOLUTION parameter.  However, it is
   placed in the unsigned part of the I2 packet.  The Initiator echoes
   the puzzle parameters in the OFFLOADED_SOLUTION, while leaving the
   solution value blank.  When receiving an OFFLOADED_SOLUTION
   parameter, an on-path middlebox computes the solution based on the
   parameter fields in the OFFLOADED_SOLUTION parameter and places the
   solution value in the blank solution field of the OFFLOADED_SOLUTION.
   The algorithm used to compute the puzzle solution can be derived from
   the HIT of the Responder contained in the HIP header.  Note that the
   puzzle offloading extension is designed not to require additional
   state at either the initiator, the middlebox, or the responder.

3.2.  Assisting Resource-constrained Responders

   A resource-constrained device that is currently under high load may
   receive an initial handshake packet (I1).  In order to protect
   against attacks from within the local (resource-constrained) network
   environment, the Responder SHOULD set a low puzzle difficulty by



Hummen, et al.            Expires July 13, 2013                 [Page 7]


Internet-Draft              Hip-Middle-Puzzle               January 2013


   default.  To still protect against malicious Internet hosts, an on-
   path middlebox notifies the Responder about handshakes that originate
   from the Internet.  Such a notification SHOULD trigger the Responder
   to set a higher puzzle difficulty for this specific handshake
   targeting the uncertain capabilities of the Internet-connected peer.

    Initiator               Middlebox               Responder
                       .-----------------.
     I1                |                 |  I1 + VUN
    -----------------> | Add IH          | ----------------->
                       |                 |
     R1                |                 |  R1
    <----------------- |                 | <-----------------
                       |                 |
     I2                |                 |  I2
    -----------------> |                 | ----------------->
                       |                 |
     R2                |                 |  R2
    <----------------- |                 | <-----------------
                       '-----------------'

    VUN: Via Untrusted Network

                                 Figure 2

   As shown in Figure 2, the middlebox notifies the Responder in the I1
   packet that the current handshake originates from an Internet host.
   The Responder SHOULD then set the puzzle difficulty as to protect
   against an attack from a desktop-class device.


4.  HIP Parameters

   This HIP extension specifies four new HIP parameters that allow on-
   path middleboxes to assist in choosing a puzzle difficulty as well as
   in computing a puzzle solution on behalf of a host.

4.1.  HOST_OFFLOADING_SUPPORT

   The Responder MAY append the HOST_OFFLOADING_SUPPORT parameter to an
   R1 packet in order to indicate the support of the puzzle offloading
   mechanism described in this document.  The parameter is located in
   the signed part of the HIP control packet and is, therefore, bound to
   the host identity of the Responder.







Hummen, et al.            Expires July 13, 2013                 [Page 8]


Internet-Draft              Hip-Middle-Puzzle               January 2013


    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            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                            Padding                            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type           5600
   Length         0

4.2.  MIDDLEBOX_OFFLOADING_SUPPORT

   A middlebox MAY append the MIDDLEBOX_OFFLOADING_SUPPORT parameter to
   an R1 packet in order to indicate the support of the puzzle
   offloading mechanism described in this document.  The parameter is
   located in the unsigned part of the HIP control packet.  Middleboxes
   SHOULD check for the existence of an MIDDLEBOX_OFFLOADING_SUPPORT in
   the R1 packet before adding the parameter in order to prevent
   multiple parameters of this type to be included in the R1 packet.
   Note, however, that this check SHOULD be done for reasons of space-
   efficiency and does not have an impact on the offloading mechanism
   itself.  Middleboxes that support the puzzle offloading extension
   SHOULD NOT keep per-association state about their notifications.

    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            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                            Padding                            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type           64600
   Length         0

4.3.  OFFLOADED_SOLUTION

   When receiving a HOST_OFFLOADING_SUPPORT and a
   MIDDLEBOX_OFFLOADING_SUPPORT parameter in the R1 packet, the
   Initiator MAY add the OFFLOADED_SOLUTION instead of the SOLUTION
   parameter in the I2 packet.  In this case, the Initiator SHOULD skip
   the computation of the puzzle solution.

   The structure and semantics of the OFFLOADED_SOLUTION parameter equal
   the SOLUTION parameter in [RFC5201].  However, the Initiator sets the
   #J to 0.  This indicates that an on-path middlebox MUST compute the
   puzzle solution.



Hummen, et al.            Expires July 13, 2013                 [Page 9]


Internet-Draft              Hip-Middle-Puzzle               January 2013


   When receiving an I2 packet containing the OFFLOADED_SOLUTION
   parameter, an on-path middlebox that supports the puzzle offloading
   extension first inspects the #J. If #J is 0, the middlebox uses the
   echoed PUZZLE values in the OFFLOADED_SOLUTION parameter as well as
   the RHASH function to compute the puzzle solution.  It then adds the
   computed solution to the #J of the OFFLOADED_SOLUTION parameter.
   Hence, the first middlebox supporting the puzzle offloading mechanism
   computes the puzzle solution on behalf of the Initiator.  Note that
   the OFFLOADED_SOLUTION parameter is located in the unsigned part of
   the HIP packet.  Hence, the modification of the parameter by the
   middlebox does not invalidate existing integrity protection
   mechanisms.

    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            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | #K, 1 byte   |   Reserved    |        Opaque, 2 bytes        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                      Random #I, n bytes                       |
   /                                                               /
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Puzzle solution #J, RHASH_len/8 bytes              |
   /                                                               /
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type           64602
   Length         4 + RHASH_len /4
   #K             #K is the number of verified bits
   Reserved       zero when sent, ignored when received
   Opaque         copied unmodified from the received PUZZLE
   Random #I      random number of size RHASH_len bits
   Puzzle solution #J random number of size RHASH_len bits

4.4.  VIA_UNTRUSTED_NETWORK

   A middlebox MAY append the VIA_UNTRUSTED_NETWORK parameter to an R1
   packet in order to indicate that the handshake is routed via an
   untrusted network.  As a result, the Responder SHOULD set the puzzle
   difficulty in the PUZZLE parameter to target the uncertain
   capabilities of the peer host.









Hummen, et al.            Expires July 13, 2013                [Page 10]


Internet-Draft              Hip-Middle-Puzzle               January 2013


    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            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                            Padding                            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type           64604
   Length         0


5.  Security Considerations

   This document describes a modification of the HIP puzzle mechanism
   used in the initial HIP handshake.  The puzzle offloading extension
   replaces the signed SOLUTION parameter by the unsigned
   OFFLOADED_SOLUTION parameter.  This allows an on-path attacker to
   increase the puzzle difficulty K. As a result, the middlebox has to
   commit additional resources for computing the puzzle solution for a
   higher difficulty than originally required by the Responder.

   The MIDDLEBOX_OFFLOADING_SUPPORT parameter is not cryptographically
   bound to a specific middlebox that claims to support the extension
   and to take over the workload of computing the puzzle solution.
   Hence, an on-path attacker could use the new parameter to trick the
   Initiator into using the offloading extension described in this
   document, although it is not supported on the communication path or
   despite the fact that he is unwilling to compute the puzzle solution.
   As a result, the Responder would receive a blank, invalid puzzle
   solution and drop the I2 packet.  However, the attacker could achieve
   the same result by simply dropping any of the handshake packets.

   The VIA_UNTRUSTED_NETWORK parameter is not cryptographically bound to
   the middlebox that claims a specific handshake to originate from an
   untrusted network.  Hence, an on-path attacker could trick the
   Responder into increasing the puzzle difficulty, although the peer
   host is within the local (resource-constrained) network environment.
   As a result, the Initiator would drop the resulting puzzle due to its
   excessive difficulty.  However, the attacker could simply drop the I1
   or the R1 packet in order to achieve the same result.


6.  IANA Considerations

   This document specifies four new HIP parameter types.  The
   preliminary parameter type numbers are 5600, 64600, 64602, and 64604.




Hummen, et al.            Expires July 13, 2013                [Page 11]


Internet-Draft              Hip-Middle-Puzzle               January 2013


7.  Changelog

7.1.  Version 1

   - Rename INTERNET_HOST to VIA_UNTRUSTED_NETWORK parameter in Figure 2

   - Add reference to RFC 3234

   - Editorial changes

7.2.  Version 0

   - Initial Version


8.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-6lowpan-nd]
              Shelby, Z., Chakrabarti, S., and E. Nordmark, "Neighbor
              Discovery Optimization for Low Power and Lossy Networks
              (6LoWPAN)", draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd-21 (work in progress),
              August 2012.

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

   [RFC3234]  Carpenter, B. and S. Brim, "Middleboxes: Taxonomy and
              Issues", RFC 3234, February 2002.

   [RFC5201]  Moskowitz, R., Nikander, P., Jokela, P., and T. Henderson,
              "Host Identity Protocol", RFC 5201, April 2008.


Authors' Addresses

   Rene Hummen (editor)
   RWTH Aachen University, Communication and Distributed Systems Group
   Ahornstrasse 55
   Aachen  52074
   Germany

   Email: hummen@cs.rwth-aachen.de
   URI:   http://www.comsys.rwth-aachen.de/team/rene-hummen/








Hummen, et al.            Expires July 13, 2013                [Page 12]


Internet-Draft              Hip-Middle-Puzzle               January 2013


   Martin Henze
   RWTH Aachen University, Communication and Distributed Systems Group
   Ahornstrasse 55
   Aachen  52074
   Germany

   Email: henze@comsys.rwth-aachen.de
   URI:   http://www.comsys.rwth-aachen.de/team/martin-henze/


   Jens Hiller
   RWTH Aachen University, Communication and Distributed Systems Group
   Ahornstrasse 55
   Aachen  52074
   Germany

   Email: hiller@comsys.rwth-aachen.de


































Hummen, et al.            Expires July 13, 2013                [Page 13]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.127, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/