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

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 draft-ietf-sidr-cps

Secure Inter-Domain Routing (sidr)                             Kong, D.
Internet Draft                                                  Seo, K.
Expires: October 2010                                          Kent, S.
Intended Status: BCP                                   BBN Technologies
                                                          March 8, 2010



                              Template for an
        Internet Registry's Certification Practice Statement (CPS)
                        for the Resource PKI (RPKI)
                      draft-ietf-sidr-cps-irs-05.txt


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), 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 October 31, 2010.

Abstract

   This document contains a template to be used for creating a
   Certification Practice Statement (CPS) for an Internet Registry
   (e.g., NIR or RIR) that is part of the Resource Public Key
   Infrastructure (RPKI).








Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                  [Page 1]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


Conventions used in this document

   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 RFC-2119 [RFC2119].

Table of Contents


   Preface...........................................................7
   1. Introduction...................................................8
      1.1. Overview..................................................8
      1.2. Document name and identification..........................9
      1.3. PKI participants..........................................9
         1.3.1. Certification authorities............................9
         1.3.2. Registration authorities.............................9
         1.3.3. Subscribers.........................................10
         1.3.4. Relying parties.....................................10
         1.3.5. Other participants..................................10
      1.4. Certificate usage........................................10
         1.4.1. Appropriate certificate uses........................10
         1.4.2. Prohibited certificate uses.........................10
      1.5. Policy administration....................................11
         1.5.1. Organization administering the document.............11
         1.5.2. Contact person......................................11
         1.5.3. Person determining CPS suitability for the policy...11
         1.5.4. CPS approval procedures.............................11
      1.6. Definitions and acronyms.................................11
   2. Publication And Repository Responsibilities...................13
      2.1. Repositories.............................................13
      2.2. Publication of certification information.................13
      2.3. Time or Frequency of Publication.........................13
      2.4. Access controls on repositories..........................13
   3. Identification And Authentication.............................15
      3.1. Naming...................................................15
         3.1.1. Types of names......................................15
         3.1.2. Need for names to be meaningful.....................15
         3.1.3. Anonymity or pseudonymity of subscribers............15
         3.1.4. Rules for interpreting various name forms...........15
         3.1.5. Uniqueness of names.................................15
         3.1.6. Recognition, authentication, and role of trademarks.16
      3.2. Initial identity validation..............................16
         3.2.1. Method to prove possession of private key...........16
         3.2.2. Authentication of organization identity.............16
         3.2.3. Authentication of individual identity...............16
         3.2.4. Non-verified subscriber information.................17
         3.2.5. Validation of authority.............................17
         3.2.6. Criteria for interoperation.........................17


Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                  [Page 2]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


      3.3. Identification and authentication for re-key requests....17
         3.3.1. Identification and authentication for routine re-key17
         3.3.2. Identification and authentication for re-key after
         revocation.................................................18
      3.4. Identification and authentication for revocation request.18
   4. Certificate Life-Cycle Operational Requirements...............19
      4.1. Certificate Application..................................19
         4.1.1. Who can submit a certificate application............19
         4.1.2. Enrollment process and responsibilities.............19
      4.2. Certificate application processing.......................19
         4.2.1. Performing identification and authentication functions
         ...........................................................19
         4.2.2. Approval or rejection of certificate applications...19
         4.2.3. Time to process certificate applications............20
      4.3. Certificate issuance.....................................20
         4.3.1. CA actions during certificate issuance..............20
         4.3.2. Notification to subscriber by the CA of issuance of
         certificate................................................20
         4.3.3. Notification of certificate issuance by the CA to other
         entities...................................................20
      4.4. Certificate acceptance...................................20
         4.4.1. Conduct constituting certificate acceptance.........20
         4.4.2. Publication of the certificate by the CA............20
      4.5. Key pair and certificate usage...........................20
         4.5.1. Subscriber private key and certificate usage........21
         4.5.2. Relying party public key and certificate usage......21
      4.6. Certificate renewal......................................21
         4.6.1. Circumstance for certificate renewal................21
         4.6.2. Who may request renewal.............................21
         4.6.3. Processing certificate renewal requests.............22
         4.6.4. Notification of new certificate issuance to subscriber
         ...........................................................22
         4.6.5. Conduct constituting acceptance of a renewal
         certificate................................................22
         4.6.6. Publication of the renewal certificate by the CA....22
         4.6.7. Notification of certificate issuance by the CA to other
         entities...................................................22
      4.7. Certificate re-key.......................................22
         4.7.1. Circumstance for certificate re-key.................22
         4.7.2. Who may request certification of a new public key...23
         4.7.3. Processing certificate re-keying requests...........23
         4.7.4. Notification of new certificate issuance to subscriber
         ...........................................................23
         4.7.5. Conduct constituting acceptance of a re-keyed
         certificate................................................23
         4.7.6. Publication of the re-keyed certificate by the CA...24
         4.7.7. Notification of certificate issuance by the CA to other
         entities...................................................24


Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                  [Page 3]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


      4.8. Certificate modification.................................24
         4.8.1. Circumstance for certificate modification...........24
         4.8.2. Who may request certificate modification............24
         4.8.3. Processing certificate modification requests........24
         4.8.4. Notification of modified certificate issuance to
         subscriber.................................................25
         4.8.5. Conduct constituting acceptance of modified certificate
         ...........................................................25
         4.8.6. Publication of the modified certificate by the CA...25
         4.8.7. Notification of certificate issuance by the CA to other
         entities...................................................25
      4.9. Certificate revocation and suspension....................25
         4.9.1. Circumstances for revocation........................25
         4.9.2. Who can request revocation..........................25
         4.9.3. Procedure for revocation request....................26
         4.9.4. Revocation request grace period.....................26
         4.9.5. Time within which CA must process the revocation
         request....................................................26
         4.9.6. Revocation checking requirement for relying parties.26
         4.9.7. CRL issuance frequency..............................26
         4.9.8. Maximum latency for CRLs............................26
      4.10. Certificate status services.............................26
   5. Facility, Management, and Operational Controls................27
      5.1. Physical controls........................................27
         5.1.1. Site location and construction......................27
         5.1.2. Physical access.....................................27
         5.1.3. Power and air conditioning..........................27
         5.1.4. Water exposures.....................................27
         5.1.5. Fire prevention and protection......................27
         5.1.6. Media storage.......................................27
         5.1.7. Waste disposal......................................27
         5.1.8. Off-site backup.....................................27
      5.2. Procedural controls......................................27
         5.2.1. Trusted roles.......................................27
         5.2.2. Number of persons required per task.................27
         5.2.3. Identification and authentication for each role.....27
         5.2.4. Roles requiring separation of duties................27
      5.3. Personnel controls.......................................27
         5.3.1. Qualifications, experience, and clearance requirements
         ...........................................................28
         5.3.2. Background check procedures.........................28
         5.3.3. Training requirements...............................28
         5.3.4. Retraining frequency and requirements...............28
         5.3.5. Job rotation frequency and sequence.................28
         5.3.6. Sanctions for unauthorized actions..................28
         5.3.7. Independent contractor requirements.................28
         5.3.8. Documentation supplied to personnel.................28
      5.4. Audit logging procedures.................................28


Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                  [Page 4]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


         5.4.1. Types of events recorded............................28
         5.4.2. Frequency of processing log.........................28
         5.4.3. Retention period for audit log......................28
         5.4.4. Protection of audit log.............................29
         5.4.5. Audit log backup procedures.........................29
         5.4.6. Audit collection system (internal vs. external)
         [OMITTED]..................................................29
         5.4.7. Notification to event-causing subject [OMITTED].....29
         5.4.8. Vulnerability assessments...........................29
      5.5. Records archival [OMITTED]...............................29
      5.6. Key changeover...........................................29
      5.7. Compromise and disaster recovery [OMITTED]...............29
      5.8. CA or RA termination.....................................29
   6. Technical Security Controls...................................30
      6.1. Key pair generation and installation.....................30
         6.1.1. Key pair generation.................................30
         6.1.2. Private key delivery to subscriber..................30
         6.1.3. Public key delivery to certificate issuer...........30
         6.1.4. CA public key delivery to relying parties...........30
         6.1.5. Key sizes...........................................31
         6.1.6. Public key parameters generation and quality checking31
         6.1.7. Key usage purposes (as per X.509 v3 key usage field)31
      6.2. Private Key Protection and Cryptographic Module Engineering
      Controls......................................................31
         6.2.1. Cryptographic module standards and controls.........31
         6.2.2. Private key (n out of m) multi-person control.......31
         6.2.3. Private key escrow..................................31
         6.2.4. Private key backup..................................32
         6.2.5. Private key archival................................32
         6.2.6. Private key transfer into or from a cryptographic
         module.....................................................32
         6.2.7. Private key storage on cryptographic module.........32
         6.2.8. Method of activating private key....................32
         6.2.9. Method of deactivating private key..................32
         6.2.10. Method of destroying private key...................32
         6.2.11. Cryptographic Module Rating........................33
      6.3. Other aspects of key pair management.....................33
         6.3.1. Public key archival.................................33
         6.3.2. Certificate operational periods and key pair usage
         periods....................................................33
      6.4. Activation data..........................................33
         6.4.1. Activation data generation and installation.........33
         6.4.2. Activation data protection..........................33
         6.4.3. Other aspects of activation data....................33
      6.5. Computer security controls...............................33
         6.5.1. Specific computer security technical requirement....33
      6.6. Life cycle technical controls............................34
         6.6.1. System development controls.........................34


Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                  [Page 5]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


         6.6.2. Security management controls........................34
         6.6.3. Life cycle security controls........................34
      6.7. Network security controls................................34
      6.8. Time-stamping............................................34
   7. Certificate and CRL Profiles..................................34
   8. Please refer to the Certificate and CRL Profile [RFCyyyy].....34
   8. Compliance Audit and Other Assessments........................35
      8.1. Frequency or circumstances of assessment.................35
      8.2. Identity/qualifications of assessor......................35
      8.3. Assessor's relationship to assessed entity...............35
      8.4. Topics covered by assessment.............................35
      8.5. Actions taken as a result of deficiency..................35
      8.6. Communication of results.................................35
   9. Other Business And Legal Matters..............................36
      9.1. Fees.....................................................36
         9.1.1. Certificate issuance or renewal fees................36
         9.1.2. Fees for other services (if applicable).............36
         9.1.3. Refund policy.......................................36
      9.2. Financial responsibility.................................36
         9.2.1. Insurance coverage..................................36
         9.2.2. Other assets........................................36
         9.2.3. Insurance or warranty coverage for end-entities.....36
      9.3. Confidentiality of business information..................36
         9.3.1. Scope of confidential information...................36
         9.3.2. Information not within the scope of confidential
         information................................................36
         9.3.3. Responsibility to protect confidential information..36
      9.4. Privacy of personal information..........................36
         9.4.1. Privacy plan........................................36
         9.4.2. Information treated as private......................36
         9.4.3. Information not deemed private......................36
         9.4.4. Responsibility to protect private information.......36
         9.4.5. Notice and consent to use private information.......36
         9.4.6. Disclosure pursuant to judicial or administrative
         process....................................................36
         9.4.7. Other information disclosure circumstances..........37
      9.5. Intellectual property rights (if applicable).............37
      9.6. Representations and warranties...........................37
         9.6.1. CA representations and warranties...................37
         9.6.2. Subscriber representations and warranties...........37
         9.6.3. Relying party representations and warranties........37
      9.7. Disclaimers of warranties................................37
      9.8. Limitations of liability.................................37
      9.9. Indemnities..............................................37
      9.10. Term and termination....................................37
         9.10.1. Term...............................................37
         9.10.2. Termination........................................37
         9.10.3. Effect of termination and survival.................37


Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                  [Page 6]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


      9.11. Individual notices and communications with participants.37
      9.12. Amendments..............................................37
         9.12.1. Procedure for amendment............................37
         9.12.2. Notification mechanism and period..................37
      9.13. Dispute resolution provisions...........................37
      9.14. Governing law...........................................37
      9.15. Compliance with applicable law..........................37
      9.16. Miscellaneous provisions................................37
         9.16.1. Entire agreement...................................37
         9.16.2. Assignment.........................................37
         9.16.3. Severability.......................................37
         9.16.4. Enforcement (attorneys' fees and waiver of rights).38
         9.16.5. Force Majeure......................................38
   10. Security Considerations......................................39
   11. IANA Considerations..........................................39
   12. Acknowledgments..............................................39
   13. References...................................................39
      13.1. Normative References....................................39
      13.2. Informative References..................................40
   Author's Addresses...............................................40
   Pre-5378 Material Disclaimer.....................................41
   Copyright Statement..............................................41



Preface

   This document contains a template to be used for creating a
   Certification Practice Statement (CPS) for an Internet Registry
   (e.g., an NIR or RIR) that is part of the Resource Public Key
   Infrastructure (RPKI).  The user of this document should

     1. substitute a title page for page 1 saying, e.g., ''<Name of
        Registry> Certification Practice Statement for the Resource
        Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)'' with date, author, etc.

     2. delete this Preface

     3. fill in the information indicated below by <text in angle
        brackets>

     4. delete sections 10, 11, 12, 13.1, Acknowledgments, Author's
        Addresses, Intellectual Property Statement, Disclaimer of
        Validity, Copyright Statement, Acknowledgments; leaving a
        reference section with just the references in 13.2

     5. update the table of contents to reflect the deletions and
        additions above.


Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                  [Page 7]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


   Note: This CPS is based on the template specified in RFC 3647. A
   number of sections contained in the template were omitted from this
   CPS because they did not apply to this PKI. However, we have
   retained the section numbering scheme employed in the RFC to
   facilitate comparison with the outline in the RFC. [There are 4 sub-
   sections that I haven't removed yet due to Word problems.)

1. Introduction

   This document is the Certification Practice Statement (CPS) of <Name
   of Registry>.  It describes the practices employed by the <Name of
   Registry> Certification Authority (CA) in the Resource Public Key
   Infrastructure (RPKI).   These practices are defined in accordance
   with the requirements of the Certificate Policy (CP, [RFCxxxx]) of
   this PKI.

   The RPKI is designed to support validation of claims by current
   holders of Internet Number Resources (INRs, see definition in 1.7)
   in accordance with the records of the organizations that act as CAs
   in this PKI. The ability to verify such claims is essential to
   ensuring the unique, unambiguous distribution of these resources

   This PKI parallels the existing INR distribution hierarchy. These
   resources are distributed by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
   (IANA) to the Regional Internet Registries. In some regions,
   National Internet Registries (NIRs) form a tier of the hierarchy
   below the RIRs for internet number resource (INR) distribution. ISPs
   and network subscribers form additional tiers below registries.

1.1. Overview

   This CPS describes:

     . Participants

     . Publication of the certificates and CRLs

     . How certificates are issued, managed, and revoked

     . Facility management (physical security, personnel, audit, etc.)

     . Key management

     . Audit procedures

     . Business and legal issues




Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                  [Page 8]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


   This PKI encompasses several types of certificates (see IETF
   document draft-ietf-sidr-arch-xx [ARCH] for more details):

  . CA certificates for each organization distributing INRs and for
     each subscriber (INR holder)

  . End entity (EE) certificates for organizations to use to validate
     digital signatures on RPKI-signed objects (see definition in 1.7).

  . In the future, the PKI also may include end entity certificates in
     support of access control for the repository system as described
     in 2.4.

1.2. Document name and identification

   The name of this document is ''<Name of Registry>'s Certification
   Practice Statement for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure
   (RPKI)''.

1.3. PKI participants

   Note: In a PKI, the term ''subscriber'' refers to an individual or
   organization that is a Subject of a certificate issued by a CA. The
   term is used in this fashion throughout this document, without
   qualification, and should not be confused with the networking use of
   the term to refer to an individual or organization that receives
   service from an ISP. In such cases the term ''network subscriber''
   will be used. Also note that, for brevity, this document always
   refers to PKI participants as organizations or entities, even though
   some of them are individuals.

1.3.1. Certification authorities

   <Describe the CAs that you will operate for the RPKI.  One approach
   is to operate two CAs: one designated ''offline'' and the other
   designated ''production.'' The offline CA is the top level CA for the
   <Name of Registry> portion of the RPKI. It provides a secure
   revocation and recovery capability in case the production CA is
   compromised or becomes unavailable. Thus the offline CA issues
   certificates only to instances of the production CA; and the CRLs it
   issues are used to revoke only certificates issued to the production
   CA. The production CA is used to issue RPKI certificates to <Name of
   Registry> members, to whom INRs have been distributed. >

1.3.2. Registration authorities

   <Describe how the registration authority function is handled for the
   CA(s) that you operate.  The RPKI does not require establishment or


Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                  [Page 9]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


   use of a separate registration authority (RA) in conjunction with
   the CA function. The RA function will be provided by the same entity
   operating as a CA, e.g., entities listed in Section 1.3.1. An entity
   acting as a CA in this PKI already has a formal relationship with
   each organization to which it distributes INRs. These organizations
   already perform the RA function implicitly since they already assume
   responsibility for distributing INRs.>

1.3.3. Subscribers

   Two types of organizations receive distributions of INRs from this
   CA and thus are subscribers in the PKI sense: network subscribers
   and Internet Service Providers (ISPs). <Additionally, this CA issues
   certificates to <National> Registries, who, in turn, issue
   certificates to network subscribers or ISPs.>

1.3.4. Relying parties

   Entities or individuals that act in reliance on certificates or
   RPKI-signed objects issued under this PKI are relying parties.
   Relying parties may or may not be subscribers within this PKI. (See
   section 1.7 for the definition of an RPKI-signed object.)

1.3.5. Other participants

   <Name of Registry> will operate a repository that holds
   certificates, CRLs, and other RPKI-signed objects.

1.4. Certificate usage

1.4.1. Appropriate certificate uses

   The certificates issued under this hierarchy are for authorization
   in support of validation of claims of current holdings of INRs.

   Additional uses of the certificates, consistent with the basic goal
   cited above, are also permitted under the RPKI certificate policy.

   Some of the certificates that may be issued under this PKI could be
   used to support operation of this infrastructure, e.g., access
   control for the repository system as described in 2.4. Such uses
   also are permitted under the RPKI certificate policy.

1.4.2. Prohibited certificate uses

   Any uses other than those described in Section 1.4.1 are prohibited.




Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 10]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


1.5. Policy administration

1.5.1. Organization administering the document

   This CPS is administered by <Name of Registry>.

1.5.2. Contact person

   <Insert Registry contact info here>

1.5.3. Person determining CPS suitability for the policy

   Not applicable.  Each organization issuing a certificate in this PKI
   is attesting to the distribution of INRs to the holder of the
   private key corresponding to the public key in the certificate. The
   issuing organizations are the same organizations as the ones that
   perform the distribution hence they are authoritative with respect
   to the accuracy of this binding.

1.5.4. CPS approval procedures

   Not applicable. Each organization issuing a certificate in this PKI
   is attesting to the distribution of INRs to the holder of the
   private key corresponding to the public key in the certificate. The
   issuing organizations are the same organizations as the ones that
   perform the distribution hence they are authoritative with respect
   to the accuracy of this binding.

1.6. Definitions and acronyms

   BPKI - Business PKI. A BPKI is an optional additional PKI used by an
         RIR to identify members to whom RPKI certificates can be
         issued.

   CP -  Certificate Policy. A CP is a named set of rules that
         indicates the applicability of a certificate to a particular
         community and/or class of applications with common security
         requirements.

   CPS - Certification Practice Statement. A CPS is a document that
         specifies the practices that a Certification Authority employs
         in issuing certificates.








Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 11]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


   Distribution of INRs -                             - A process of distribution of the INRs along
         the respective number hierarchy. IANA distributes blocks of IP
         addresses and Autonomous System Numbers to the five Regional
         Internet Registries (RIRs). RIRs distribute smaller address
         blocks and Autonomous System Numbers to organizations within
         their service regions, who in turn distribute IP addresses to
         their customers.

   IANA -   Internet Assigned Numbers Authority. IANA is responsible
         for global coordination of the Internet Protocol addressing
         systems and Autonomous System (AS) numbers used for routing
         internet traffic. IANA distributes INRs to Regional Internet
         Registries (RIRs).

   INRs - Internet Number Resources. INRs are number values for three
         protocol parameter sets, namely:

        . IP Version 4 addresses,

        . IP version 6 addresses, and

        . Identifiers used in Internet inter-domain routing, currently
          Border Gateway Protocol-4 Autonomous System numbers.

   ISP -            - Internet Service Provider. An ISP is an organization managing
         and selling Internet services to other organizations.

   NIR -            - National Internet Registry. An NIR is an organization that
         manages the distribution of INRS for a portion of the
         geopolitical area covered by a Regional Registry. NIRs form an
         optional second tier in the tree scheme used to manage INR
         distribution.

   RIR - Regional Internet Registry.  An RIR is an organization that
         manages the distribution of INRs for a geopolitical area.

   RPKI-signed object -                           - An RPKI-signed object is a digitally signed
         data object (other than a certificate or CRL) declared to be
         such by a standards track RFC, and that can be validated using
         certificates issued under this PKI. The content and format of
         these data constructs depend on the context in which
         validation of claims of current holdings of INRs takes place.
         Examples of these objects are repository manifests and CRLs.







Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 12]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


2. Publication And Repository Responsibilities

2.1. Repositories

   As per the CP, certificates, CRLs and RPKI-signed objects MUST be
   made available for downloading by all relying parties to enable them
   to validate this data.

   The <Name of Registry> RPKI CA will publish certificates, CRLs, and
   RPKI-signed objects via a repository that is accessible via RSYNC at
   rpki.<Name of Registry>.net.

2.2. Publication of certification information

   <Name of Registry> MUST publish certificates, CRLs, and RPKI-signed
   objects issued by it to a local repository system that it operates
   as part of a world-wide distributed system of repositories.

2.3. Time or Frequency of Publication

   <Describe here your procedures for publication (via the repository)
   of the certificates, CRLs and RPKI-signed objects that you issue. If
   you choose to outsource publication of PKI data, you still need to
   provide this information for relying parties. This should include
   the period of time within which a certificate will be published
   after he CA issues the certificate and the period of time within
   which a CA will publish a CRL with an entry for a revoked
   certificate after it revokes that certificate. >

   As per the CP, the following standard exists for publication times
   and frequency:

   The <Name of Registry> RPKI CA MUST publish its CRL prior to the
   nextScheduledUpdate value in the scheduled CRL previously issued by
   the CA.

2.4. Access controls on repositories

   Access to the repository system, for modification of entries, must
   be controlled to prevent denial of service attacks. All data
   (certificates, CRLs and RPKI-signed objects) published to a
   repository are digitally signed. RPKI items that <Name of Registry>
   issues MUST be published to the repository that it runs by means not
   accessible to the outside world. <If <Name of Registry> offers
   repository services to its subscribers, then <describe here the
   protocol(s) that you support for their publishing of signed
   objects.>



Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 13]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010




















































Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 14]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010




3. Identification And Authentication

3.1. Naming

3.1.1. Types of names

   The Subject of each certificate issued by this Registry is
   identified by an X.500 Distinguished Name (DN). The distinguished
   name will consist of a single Common Name (CN) attribute with a
   value generated by <Name of Registry>. Optionally, the serialNumber
   attribute may be included along with the common name (to form a
   terminal relative distinguished name set), to distinguish among
   successive instances of certificates associated with the same
   entity.

3.1.2. Need for names to be meaningful

   The Subject name in each subscriber certificate will be unique
   relative to all certificates issued by <Name of Registry>. However,
   there is no guarantee that the subject name will be globally unique
   in this PKI. Also, the name of the subscriber need not to be
   ''meaningful'' in the conventional, human-readable sense.  The
   certificates issued under this PKI are used for authorization in
   support of applications that make use of attestations of Internet
   resource holding, not for identification

3.1.3. Anonymity or pseudonymity of subscribers

   Although Subject names in certificates issued by this registry need
   not be meaningful, and may appear ''random,'' anonymity is not a
   function of this PKI, and thus no explicit support for this feature
   is provided.

3.1.4. Rules for interpreting various name forms

   None

3.1.5. Uniqueness of names

   <Name of Registry> certifies Subject names that are unique among the
   certificates that it issues. Although it is desirable that these
   Subject names be unique throughout the PKI, to facilitate
   certificate path discovery, such uniqueness is neither mandated nor
   enforced through technical means.




Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 15]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


3.1.6. Recognition, authentication, and role of trademarks

   Because the Subject names are not intended to be meaningful, there
   is no provision to recognize or authenticate trademarks, service
   marks, etc.

3.2. Initial identity validation

3.2.1. Method to prove possession of private key

   <Describe the method whereby each subscriber will be required to
   demonstrate proof-of-possession (PoP) of the private key
   corresponding to the public key in the certificate, prior to <Name
   of Registry's> issuing the certificate. One possible approach makes
   use of the PKCS #10 format, as profiled in [RFCyyyy]. This request
   format requires that the PKCS #10 request be signed using the (RSA)
   private key corresponding to the public key in the certificate
   request. This mechanism provides proof of possession by the
   requester.>

3.2.2. Authentication of organization identity

   Certificates issued under this PKI do not attest to the
   organizational identity of subscribers, with the exception of
   registries. However, certificates are issued to subscribers in a
   fashion that preserves the accuracy of distributions as represented
   in <Name of Registry> records.

   <Describe the method whereby this is accomplished.  For example, a
   BPKI certificate could be used to authenticate a certificate request
   that serves as a link to the <Name of Registry> subscriber database
   that maintains the INR distribution records. The certificate request
   could be matched against the database record for the subscriber in
   question, and an RPKI certificate would be issued only if the INRs
   requested were a subset of those held by the subscriber.>

3.2.3. Authentication of individual identity

   Certificates issued under this PKI do not attest to the individual
   identity of a subscriber. However, <Name of Registry> maintains
   contact information for each subscriber in support of certificate
   renewal, re-key, or revocation.

   < Describe the procedures that MUST be used to identify at least one
   individual as a representative of each subscriber. This is done in
   support of issuance, renewal, and revocation of the certificate
   issued to the organization. For example, one might say ''The <Name of
   Registry> BPKI (see Section 3.2.6) issues certificates that MUST be


Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 16]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


   used to identify individuals who represent <Name of Registry>
   subscribers.'' The procedures should be commensurate with those you
   already employ in authenticating individuals as representatives for
   INR holders. Note that this authentication is solely for use by you
   in dealing with the organizations to which you distribute (or sub-
   distribute) INRs, and thus must not be relied upon outside of this
   CA-subscriber relationship>

3.2.4. Non-verified subscriber information

   No non-verified subscriber data is included in certificates issued
   under this certificate policy except for SIA/AIA extensions.

3.2.5. Validation of authority

   <Describe what procedures that MUST be used to verify that an
   individual claiming to represent a subscriber, is authorized to
   represent that subscriber in this context. For example, one could
   say, ''Only an individual to whom a BPKI certificate (see Section
   3.2.6) has been issued may request issuance of an RPKI certificate.
   Each certificate issuance request is verified using the BPKI.'' The
   procedures should be commensurate with those you already employ as a
   registry in authenticating individuals as representatives of
   subscribers.>

3.2.6. Criteria for interoperation

   The RPKI is neither intended nor designed to interoperate with any
   other PKI. <If you operate a separate, additional PKI for business
   purposes (BPKI), then describe (or reference) how the BPKI is used
   to authenticate subscribers and to enable them to manage their
   resource distributions.>

3.3. Identification and authentication for re-key requests

3.3.1. Identification and authentication for routine re-key

   <Describe the conditions under which routine re-key is required and
   the manner by which it is requested.  Describe the procedures that
   MUST be used to ensure that a subscriber requesting routine re-key
   is the legitimate holder of the certificate to be re-keyed. State
   the approach for establishing PoP of the private key corresponding
   to the new public key. If you operate a BPKI, describe how that BPKI
   is used to authenticate routine re-key requests.>






Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 17]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


3.3.2. Identification and authentication for re-key after revocation

   <Describe the procedures that MUST be used to ensure that an
   organization requesting a re-key after revocation is the legitimate
   holder of the INRs in the certificate being re-keyed. This should
   also include the method employed for verifying PoP of the private
   key corresponding to the new public key. If you operate a business-
   based PKI, describe how that BPKI is used to authenticate re-key
   requests and refer to 3.2.6. With respect to authentication of the
   subscriber, the procedures should be commensurate with those you
   already employ in the maintenance of INR distribution records.>

3.4. Identification and authentication for revocation request

   <Describe the procedures that MUST be used by an RPKI subscriber to
   make a revocation request.  Describe the manner by which it is
   ensured that the subscriber requesting revocation is the subject of
   the certificate (or an authorized representative thereof) to be
   revoked. Note that there may be different procedures for the case
   where the legitimate subject still possesses the original private
   key as opposed to the case when it no longer has access to that key.
   These procedures should be commensurate with those you already
   employ in the maintenance of subscriber records.>

   Note that if a Subscriber requests a new INR distribution, an
   existing RPKI certificate issued to the subscriber is NOT revoked,
   so long as the set of INRs distributed to the subscriber did not
   ''shrink,'' i.e., the new INRs are a superset of the old INR set.
   However, if a new INR distribution results in ''shrinkage'' of the set
   of INRs distributed to a subscriber, this triggers an implicit
   revocation of the old RPKI certificate(s) associated with that
   subscriber.


















Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 18]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


4. Certificate Life-Cycle Operational Requirements

4.1. Certificate Application

4.1.1. Who can submit a certificate application

   Any subscriber who holds INRs distributed by this registry may
   submit a certificate application to this CA.

4.1.2. Enrollment process and responsibilities

   <Describe your enrollment process for issuing certificates both for
   initial deployment of the PKI and as an ongoing process. Note that
   most of the certificates in this PKI are issued as part of your
   normal business practices, as an adjunct to INR distribution, and
   thus a separate application to request a certificate may not be
   necessary.  If so, reference should be made to where these practices
   are documented.>

4.2. Certificate application processing

   <Describe the certificate request/response processing that you will
   employ.  You should make use of existing standards for certificate
   application processing.  Relevant standards include RFC 4210,
   Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate Management
   Protocol (CMP), RFC 2797, Certificate Management Messages over CMS,
   and RSA Labs standards PKCS #7 and PKCS #10. >

4.2.1. Performing identification and authentication functions

   <Describe your practices for identification and authentication of
   certificate applicants.  Often, existing practices employed by you
   to identify and authenticate organizations can be used as the basis
   for issuance of certificates to these subscribers.  Reference can be
   made to documentation of such existing practices.>

4.2.2. Approval or rejection of certificate applications

   <Describe your practices for approval or rejection of applications
   and refer to documentation of existing business practices relevant
   to this process.  Note that according to the CP, certificate
   applications will be approved based on the normal business practices
   of the entity operating the CA, based on the CA's records of
   subscribers. The CP also says that each CA will follow the
   procedures specified in 3.2.1 to verify that the requester holds the
   private key corresponding to the public key that will be bound to
   the certificate the CA issues to the requester.>



Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 19]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


4.2.3. Time to process certificate applications

   <Specify here your expected time frame for processing certificate
   applications.>

4.3. Certificate issuance

4.3.1. CA actions during certificate issuance

   <Describe in this section your procedures for issuance and
   publication of a certificate.>

4.3.2. Notification to subscriber by the CA of issuance of certificate

   <Name of registry> MUST notify the subscriber when the certificate
   is published. <Describe here any other entities that will be
   notified when a new certificate is published.>



4.3.3. Notification of certificate issuance by the CA to other entities

   <Describe here any other entities that will be notified when a new
   certificate is published.>

4.4. Certificate acceptance

4.4.1. Conduct constituting certificate acceptance

   When a certificate is issued, the CA MUST publish it to the
   repository and notify the subscriber.  This will be done without
   subscriber review and acceptance.

4.4.2. Publication of the certificate by the CA

   Certificates MUST be published in the RPKI distributed repository
   system via publication of the certificate at <name of Registry>'s
   repository publication. This will be done within <specify the
   timeframe within which the certificate will be placed in the
   repository and the subscriber will be notified>. <Describe your
   procedures for publication of the certificate.>

4.5. Key pair and certificate usage

   A summary of the use model for the RPKI is provided below.





Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 20]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


4.5.1. Subscriber private key and certificate usage

   The certificates issued by <name of registry> to subscribers are CA
   certificates. The private key associated with each of these
   certificates is used to sign subordinate (CA or EE) certificates and
   CRLs. A subscriber may in turn issue certificates to any
   organizations to which it distributes INRs and may issue one or more
   EE certificates for use in verifying signatures on RPKI-signed
   objects signed by the subscriber. Subscribers also will issue
   certificates to operators in support of repository access control.

4.5.2. Relying party public key and certificate usage

   The primary relying parties in this PKI are organizations who will
   use RPKI EE certificates to verify RPKI-signed objects. Repositories
   will use operator certificates to verify the authorization of
   entities to engage in repository maintenance activities, and thus
   repositories represent a secondary type of relying party.

4.6. Certificate renewal

4.6.1. Circumstance for certificate renewal

   As per the CP, a certificate MUST be processed for renewal based on
   its expiration date or a renewal request from the certificate
   Subject. The request may be implicit, a side effect of renewing its
   resource holding agreement, or may be explicit. If <Name of
   Registry> initiates the renewal process based on the certificate
   expiration date, then <Name of Registry> will notify the subscriber
   <insert the period of advance warning, e.g., ''2 weeks in advance of
   the expiration date'', or the general policy, e.g., ''in conjunction
   with notification of service expiration''.>  The validity interval of
   the new (renewed) certificate will overlap that of the previous
   certificate by <insert length of overlap period, e.g., 1 week>, to
   ensure uninterrupted coverage.

   Certificate renewal will incorporate the same public key as the
   previous certificate, unless the private key has been reported as
   compromised.  If a new key pair is being used, the stipulations of
   Section 4.7 will apply.

4.6.2. Who may request renewal

   The subscriber or <Name of Registry> may initiate the renewal
   process. <For the case of the subscriber, describe the procedures
   that will be used to ensure that the requester is the legitimate
   holder of the INRs in the certificate being renewed. This should
   also include the method employed for verifying PoP of the private


Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 21]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


   key corresponding to the public key in the certificate being renewed
   or the new public key if the public key is being changed.  With
   respect to authentication of the subscriber, the procedures should
   be commensurate with those you already employ in the maintenance of
   INR distribution records. If you operate a BPKI for this, describe
   how that business-based PKI is used to authenticate re-newal
   requests and refer to 3.2.6.>

4.6.3. Processing certificate renewal requests

   <Describe your procedures for handling certificate renewal requests.
   This must include verification that the requester is the subscriber
   or is authorized by the subscriber and that the certificate in
   question has not been revoked.>

4.6.4. Notification of new certificate issuance to subscriber

   <Name of Registry> MUST notify the subscriber when the certificate
   is published. <Describe your procedure for notification of new
   certificate issuance to the subscriber. This should be consistent
   with 4.3.2.>



4.6.5. Conduct constituting acceptance of a renewal certificate

   When a renewal certificate is issued, <Name of Registry> MUST
   publish it to the repository and notify the subscriber. This will be
   done without subscriber review and acceptance.

4.6.6. Publication of the renewal certificate by the CA

   <Describe your policy and procedures for publication of a renewal
   certificate. This should be consistent with 4.4.2.>

4.6.7. Notification of certificate issuance by the CA to other entities


   <List here any other entities (besides the subscriber) who will be
   notified when a renewed certificate is issued.>

4.7. Certificate re-key

4.7.1. Circumstance for certificate re-key

   As per the CP, re-key of a certificate will be performed only when
   required, based on:


Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 22]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


  (1) knowledge or suspicion of compromise or loss of the associated
     private key, or

  (2) the expiration of the cryptographic lifetime of the associated
     key pair

   If a certificate is revoked to replace the RFC 3779 extensions, the
   replacement certificate will incorporate the same public key, not a
   new key, unless the subscriber requests a re-key at the same time.

   If the re-key is based on a suspected compromise, then the previous
   certificate will be revoked.

   Section 5.6 of the Certificate Policy notes that when a CA signs a
   certificate, the signing key should have a validity period that
   exceeds the validity period of the certificate.  This places
   additional constraints on when a CA should request a re-key.

4.7.2. Who may request certification of a new public key

   Only the subscriber may request a re-key. In addition, <Name of
   Registry> may initiate a re-key based on a verified compromise
   report. <If the subscriber (certificate Subject) requests the rekey,
   describe how authentication is effected, e.g., using the <Name of
   Registry> BPKI. Describe how a compromise report received from other
   than a subscriber is verified.>

4.7.3. Processing certificate re-keying requests

   <Describe your process for handling re-keying requests.  As per the
   CP, this should be consistent with the process described in Section
   4.3.  So reference can be made to that section.>

4.7.4. Notification of new certificate issuance to subscriber

   <Describe your policy regarding notifying the subscriber re:
   availability of the new re-keyed certificate.  This should be
   consistent with the notification process for any new certificate
   issuance (see section 4.3.2).>

4.7.5. Conduct constituting acceptance of a re-keyed certificate

   When a re-keyed certificate is issued, the CA will publish it in the
   repository and notify the subscriber.  This will be done without
   subscriber review and acceptance.





Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 23]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


4.7.6. Publication of the re-keyed certificate by the CA

   <Describe your policy regarding publication of the new certificate.
   This should be consistent with the publication process for any new
   certificate (see section 4.4.2).>

4.7.7. Notification of certificate issuance by the CA to other entities


   <List here any entities (other than the subscriber) who will be
   notified when a re-keyed certificate is issued.>

4.8. Certificate modification

4.8.1. Circumstance for certificate modification

   As per the CP, modification of a certificate occurs to implement
   changes to the RFC 3779 extension values in a certificate.  A
   subscriber can request a certificate modification when this
   information in a currently valid certificate has changed as a result
   of changes in the INR holdings of the subscriber.

   If INRs are to be distributed to a subscriber and the INRs are in
   addition to a current distribution, and if the subscriber does not
   request that a new certificate be issued containing only these
   additional resources, then this is accomplished through a
   certificate modification. When a certificate modification is
   approved, a new certificate is issued.  The new certificate will
   contain the same public key and the same expiration date as the
   original certificate, but with the incidental information corrected
   and/or the INR distribution expanded. When previously distributed
   INRs are to be removed from a certificate, then the old certificate
   MUST be revoked and a new certificate (reflecting the new
   distribution) issued.

4.8.2. Who may request certificate modification

   The subscriber or <Name of Registry> may initiate the certificate
   modification process. <For the case of the subscriber, state here
   what steps will be taken to verify the identity and authorization of
   the entity requesting the modification.>

4.8.3. Processing certificate modification requests

   <Describe your procedures for verification of the modification
   request and procedures for the issuance of a new certificate.  These
   should be consistent with the processes described in Sections 4.2
   and 4.3.1.>


Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 24]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


4.8.4. Notification of modified certificate issuance to subscriber

   <Describe your procedure for notifying the subscriber about the
   issuance of a modified certificate.  This should be consistent with
   the notification process for any new certificate (see section
   4.3.2).>

4.8.5. Conduct constituting acceptance of modified certificate

   When a modified certificate is issued, the <Name of Registry> will
   publish in the repository and notify the subscriber. This will be
   done without subscriber review and acceptance.

4.8.6. Publication of the modified certificate by the CA

   <Describe your procedure for publication of a modified certificate.
   This should be consistent with the publication process for any new
   certificate (see section 4.4.2).>

4.8.7. Notification of certificate issuance by the CA to other entities


   <List here any entities (other than the subscriber) who will be
   notified when a modified certificate is issued.>

4.9. Certificate revocation and suspension

4.9.1. Circumstances for revocation

   As per the CP, certificates can be revoked for several reasons.
   Either <Name of Registry> or the subject may choose to end the
   relationship expressed in the certificate, thus creating cause to
   revoke the certificate. If one or more of the INRs bound to the
   public key in the certificate are no longer associated with the
   subject, that too constitutes a basis for revocation.  A certificate
   also may be revoked due to loss or compromise of the private key
   corresponding to the public key in the certificate.  Finally, a
   certificate may be revoked in order to invalidate data signed by the
   private key associated with that certificate.

4.9.2. Who can request revocation

   The subscriber or <Name of Registry> may request a revocation. <For
   the case of the subscriber, describe what steps will be taken to
   verify the identity and authorization of the entity requesting the
   revocation.>




Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 25]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


4.9.3. Procedure for revocation request

   <Describe your process for handling a certificate revocation
   request.  This should include:

   o  Procedure to be used by the subscriber to request a revocation

   o  Procedure for notification of the subscriber when the revocation
   is initiated by <Name of ISP>.>

4.9.4. Revocation request grace period

   A subscriber should request revocation as soon as possible after the
   need for revocation has been identified.

4.9.5. Time within which CA must process the revocation request

   <Describe your policy on the time period within which you will
   process a revocation request.>

4.9.6. Revocation checking requirement for relying parties

   As per the CP, a relying party is responsible for acquiring and
   checking the most recent, scheduled CRL from the issuer of the
   certificate, whenever the relying party validates a certificate.

4.9.7. CRL issuance frequency

   <State the CRL issuance frequency for the CRLs that you publish.>
   Each CRL will carry a nextScheduledUpdate value; and a new CRL will
   be published at or before that time.  <Name of Registry> will set
   the nextScheduledUpdate value when it issues a CRL, to signal when
   the next scheduled CRL will be issued.

4.9.8. Maximum latency for CRLs

   A CRL will be published to the repository system within <state the
   maximum latency> after generation.

4.10. Certificate status services

   <Name of Registry> does not support OCSP or SCVP. <Name of Registry>
   issues CRLs.







Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 26]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


5. Facility, Management, and Operational Controls



5.1. Physical controls

   <As per the CP, describe the physical controls that you employ for
   certificate management. These should be commensurate to those used
   in the management of INR distribution.>

5.1.1. Site location and construction

5.1.2. Physical access

5.1.3. Power and air conditioning

5.1.4. Water exposures

5.1.5. Fire prevention and protection

5.1.6. Media storage

5.1.7. Waste disposal

5.1.8. Off-site backup

5.2. Procedural controls

   <As per the CP, describe the procedural security controls that you
   employ for certificate management.  These should be commensurate to
   those used in the management of INR distribution.>

5.2.1. Trusted roles

5.2.2. Number of persons required per task

5.2.3. Identification and authentication for each role

5.2.4. Roles requiring separation of duties

5.3. Personnel controls

   <As per the CP, describe the personnel security controls that you
   employ for individuals associated with certificate management. These
   should be commensurate to those used in the management of INR
   distribution.>




Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 27]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


5.3.1. Qualifications, experience, and clearance requirements

5.3.2. Background check procedures

5.3.3. Training requirements

5.3.4. Retraining frequency and requirements

5.3.5. Job rotation frequency and sequence

5.3.6. Sanctions for unauthorized actions

5.3.7. Independent contractor requirements

5.3.8. Documentation supplied to personnel

5.4. Audit logging procedures

   <As per the CP, describe in the following sections the details of
   how you implement audit logging.>

5.4.1. Types of events recorded

   Audit records will be generated for the basic operations of the
   certification authority computing equipment.  Audit records will
   include the date, time, responsible user or process, and summary
   content data relating to the event.  Auditable events include:

   Access to CA computing equipment (e.g., logon, logout)

   Messages received requesting CA actions (e.g., certificate requests,
   certificate revocation requests, compromise notifications)

   Certificate creation, modification, revocation, or renewal actions

   Posting of any material to a repository

   Any attempts to change or delete audit data

   <List here any additional types of events that will be audited.>

5.4.2. Frequency of processing log

   <Describe your procedures for review of audit logs.>

5.4.3. Retention period for audit log

   <Describe your policies for retention of audit logs.>


Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 28]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


5.4.4. Protection of audit log

   <Describe your policies for protection of the audit logs.>

5.4.5. Audit log backup procedures

   <Describe your policies for backup of the audit logs.>

5.4.6. Audit collection system (internal vs. external) [OMITTED]

5.4.7. Notification to event-causing subject [OMITTED]

5.4.8. Vulnerability assessments

   <Describe any vulnerability assessments that you will apply (or have
   already applied) to the PKI subsystems.  This should include whether
   such assessments have taken place and any procedures or plans to
   perform or repeat/reassess vulnerabilities in the future.>

5.5. Records archival [OMITTED]

5.6. Key changeover

   The <Name of Registry> CA certificate will contain a validity period
   that is at least as long as that of any certificate being issued
   under that certificate.  When <Name of Registry> CA wishes to change
   keys, <Name of Registry> will create a new signature key pair, and
   acquire and publish a new certificate containing the public key of
   the pair, <specify here the minimum amount of lead time, e.g.,  ''a
   minimum of 6 months''> in advance of the scheduled change of the
   current signature key pair.

5.7. Compromise and disaster recovery [OMITTED]

5.8. CA or RA termination

   <Describe your policy for management of your CA's INR distributions
   in case of its own termination.>












Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 29]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


6. Technical Security Controls

   This section describes the security controls used by <Name of
   Registry>.

6.1. Key pair generation and installation

6.1.1. Key pair generation

   <Describe the procedures that will be used to generate the CA key
   pair, and, if applicable, key pairs for subscribers.  In most
   instances, public-key pairs will be generated by the subscriber,
   i.e., the organization receiving the distribution of INRs.  However,
   your procedures may include one for generating key pairs on behalf
   of your subscribers if they so request. (This might be done for
   subscribers who do not have the ability to perform key generation in
   a secure fashion or who want a registry to provide backup for the
   subscriber private key.) Since the keys used in this PKI are not for
   non-repudiation purposes, generation of key pairs by CAs does not
   inherently undermine the security of the PKI.>

6.1.2. Private key delivery to subscriber

   <If the procedures in 6.1.1 include providing key pair generation
   services for subscribers, describe the means by which private keys
   are delivered to subscribers in a secure fashion. Otherwise say this
   is not applicable.>

6.1.3. Public key delivery to certificate issuer

   <Describe the procedures that will be used to deliver a subscriber's
   public keys to the <Name of Registry> RPKI CA.  These procedures
   should ensure that the public key has not been altered during
   transit and that the subscriber possesses the private key
   corresponding to the transferred public key. >

6.1.4. CA public key delivery to relying parties

   CA public keys for all entities (other than trust anchors) are
   contained in certificates issued by other CAs and MUST be published
   to the RPKI repository system. Relying parties MUST download these
   certificates from this system. Public key values and associated data
   for (putative) trust anchors MUST be distributed out of band and
   accepted by relying parties on the basis of locally-defined
   criteria, e.g., embedded in path validation software that will be
   made available to the Internet community.




Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 30]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


6.1.5. Key sizes

   The key sizes used in this PKI are as specified in RFC ZZZZ
   [RFCzzzz]. <Describe any deviations from this statement.>

6.1.6. Public key parameters generation and quality checking

   The public key algorithms and parameters used in this PKI are as
   specified in RFC ZZZZ [RFCzzzz]. <Describe any deviations from this
   statement.>

   <If the procedures in 6.1.1 include subscriber key pair generation,
   EITHER insert here text specifying that the subscriber is
   responsible for performing checks on the quality of its key pair and
   saying that <Name of Registry> is not responsible for performing
   such checks for subscribers OR describe the procedures used by the
   CA for checking the quality of these subscriber key pairs.>

6.1.7. Key usage purposes (as per X.509 v3 key usage field)

   The Key usage extension bit values will be consistent with RFC 5280.
   For <Name of Registry>'s CA certificates, the keyCertSign and
   cRLSign bits will be set TRUE. All other bits (including
   digitalSignature) will be set FALSE, and the extension will be
   marked critical. <Specify whether end entity certificates (e.g.,
   issued by the CA for its operators) will include this extension and
   if so, the appropriate bit values as per RFC 5280.>

6.2. Private Key Protection and Cryptographic Module Engineering
     Controls

6.2.1. Cryptographic module standards and controls

   The <Name of Registry> CA employs a cryptographic module evaluated
   under FIPS 140-2/3, at level 3 [FIPS].

6.2.2. Private key (n out of m) multi-person control

   <If you choose to use multi-person controls to constrain access to
   your CA's private keys, then insert the following text. ''There will
   be private key <insert here n> out of <insert here m> multi-person
   control.''>

6.2.3. Private key escrow

   No private key escrow procedures are required for this PKI.




Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 31]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


6.2.4. Private key backup

   <Describe the procedures used for backing up your CA's private key.
   The following aspects should be included. (1) The copying should be
   done under the same multi-party control as is used for controlling
   the original private key.  (2) At least one copy should be kept at
   an off-site location for disaster recovery purposes.>

6.2.5. Private key archival

   See sections 6.2.3 and 6.2.4

6.2.6. Private key transfer into or from a cryptographic module

   The private keys for <Name of Registry>'s production CA < if
   appropriate, change ''production CA'' to ''production and offline CAs''>
   MUST be generated by the cryptographic module specified in 6.2.1.
   The private keys will never leave the module except in encrypted
   form for backup and/or transfer to a new module.

6.2.7. Private key storage on cryptographic module

   The private key for <Name of Registry>'s production CA <if
   appropriate, change ''production CA'' to ''production and offline CAs''>
   MUST be stored in the cryptographic module and will be protected
   from unauthorized use in accordance with the FIPS 140-2/3
   requirements applicable to the module. (See [FIPS])

6.2.8. Method of activating private key

   <Describe the mechanisms and data used to activate your CA's private
   key.>

6.2.9. Method of deactivating private key

   The cryptographic module, when activated, will not be left
   unattended.  After use, it will be deactivated by <Describe the
   procedure for deactivation of your CA's private key.> The module
   will be stored securely when not in use.

6.2.10. Method of destroying private key

   <Describe the method used for destroying your CA's private key,
   e.g., when it is superseded.  This will depend on the particular
   module.>





Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 32]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


6.2.11. Cryptographic Module Rating

   The cryptographic module used by the <Name of Registry> production
   CA will be certified FIPS 140-2/3, at level 3 [FIPS].

6.3. Other aspects of key pair management

6.3.1. Public key archival

   Because this PKI does not support non-repudiation, there is no need
   to archive public keys.

6.3.2. Certificate operational periods and key pair usage periods

   The <Name of Registry> CA's key pair will have a validity interval
   of <insert number of years -                                   - Registry key pairs and certificates
   should have long validity intervals, e.g., 10 years, to minimize the
   disruption caused by key changeover for top tier CAs.>

6.4. Activation data

6.4.1. Activation data generation and installation

   <Describe how activation data for your CA will be generated.>

6.4.2. Activation data protection

   Activation data for the CA private key will be protected by
   <Describe your procedures here>.

6.4.3. Other aspects of activation data

   <Add here any details you wish to provide with regard to the
   activation data for your CA. If there are none, say ''None.''>

6.5. Computer security controls

6.5.1. Specific computer security technical requirement

   <Describe your security requirements for the computers used to
   support this PKI, e.g., requirements for authenticated logins, audit
   capabilities, etc.  These requirements should be commensurate with
   those used for the computers used for managing distribution of
   INRs.>






Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 33]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


6.6. Life cycle technical controls

6.6.1. System development controls

   <Describe any system development controls that you will apply to the
   PKI systems, e.g., use of Trusted System Development Methodology
   (TSDM) Level 2.>

6.6.2. Security management controls

   <Describe the security management controls that will be used for the
   RPKI software and equipment employed by the CA.  These security
   measures should be commensurate with those used for the systems used
   by the CAs for managing and distributing INRs.>

6.6.3. Life cycle security controls

   <Describe how the equipment (hardware and software) used for RPKI
   functions will be procured, installed, maintained, and updated.
   This should be done in a fashion commensurate with the way in which
   equipment for the management and distribution of INRs is handled. >

6.7. Network security controls

   <Describe the network security controls that will be used for CA
   operation.  These should be commensurate with the network security
   controls employed for the computers used for managing distribution
   of INRs.>

6.8. Time-stamping

   The RPKI does not make use of time stamping.

7. Certificate and CRL Profiles

8. Please refer to the Certificate and CRL Profile [RFCyyyy].














Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 34]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


Compliance Audit and Other Assessments

   <List here any audit and other assessments used to ensure the
   security of the administration of INRs. These are sufficient for the
   RPKI systems.>

8.1. Frequency or circumstances of assessment

8.2. Identity/qualifications of assessor

8.3. Assessor's relationship to assessed entity

8.4. Topics covered by assessment

8.5. Actions taken as a result of deficiency

8.6. Communication of results

































Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 35]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


9. Other Business And Legal Matters

   <The sections below are optional. Fill them in as appropriate for
   your organization. The CP says that CAs should cover 9.1 to 9.11 and
   9.13 to 9.17 although not every CA will choose to do so. Note that
   the manner in which you manage your business and legal matters for
   this PKI should be commensurate with the way in which you manage
   business and legal matters for the distribution of INRs.>



9.1. Fees

9.1.1. Certificate issuance or renewal fees

9.1.2. Fees for other services (if applicable)

9.1.3. Refund policy

9.2. Financial responsibility

9.2.1. Insurance coverage

9.2.2. Other assets

9.2.3. Insurance or warranty coverage for end-entities

9.3. Confidentiality of business information

9.3.1. Scope of confidential information

9.3.2. Information not within the scope of confidential information

9.3.3. Responsibility to protect confidential information

9.4. Privacy of personal information

9.4.1. Privacy plan

9.4.2. Information treated as private

9.4.3. Information not deemed private

9.4.4. Responsibility to protect private information

9.4.5. Notice and consent to use private information

9.4.6. Disclosure pursuant to judicial or administrative process


Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 36]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


9.4.7. Other information disclosure circumstances

9.5. Intellectual property rights (if applicable)

9.6. Representations and warranties

9.6.1. CA representations and warranties

9.6.2. Subscriber representations and warranties

9.6.3. Relying party representations and warranties

9.7. Disclaimers of warranties

9.8. Limitations of liability

9.9. Indemnities

9.10. Term and termination

9.10.1. Term

9.10.2. Termination

9.10.3. Effect of termination and survival

9.11. Individual notices and communications with participants

9.12. Amendments

9.12.1. Procedure for amendment

9.12.2. Notification mechanism and period

9.13. Dispute resolution provisions

9.14. Governing law

9.15. Compliance with applicable law

9.16. Miscellaneous provisions

9.16.1. Entire agreement

9.16.2. Assignment

9.16.3. Severability



Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 37]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


9.16.4. Enforcement (attorneys' fees and waiver of rights)

9.16.5. Force Majeure















































Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 38]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


10. Security Considerations

   The degree to which a relying party can trust the binding embodied
   in a certificate depends on several factors.  These factors can
   include the practices followed by the certification authority (CA)
   in authenticating the subject; the CA's operating policy,
   procedures, and technical security controls, including the scope of
   the subscriber's responsibilities (for example, in protecting the
   private key), and the stated responsibilities and liability terms
   and conditions of the CA (for example, warranties, disclaimers of
   warranties, and limitations of liability). This document provides a
   framework to address the technical, procedural, personnel, and
   physical security aspects of Certification Authorities, Registration
   Authorities, repositories, subscribers, and relying party
   cryptographic modules, in order to ensure that the certificate
   generation, publication, renewal, re-key, usage, and revocation is
   done in a secure manner.  Specifically, Section 3 Identification and
   Authentication (I&A); Section 4 Certificate Life-Cycle Operational
   Requirements; Section 5 Facility Management, and Operational
   Controls; Section 6 Technical Security Controls; Section 7
   Certificate and CRL Profiles; and Section 8 Compliance Audit and
   Other Assessments are oriented towards ensuring secure operation of
   the PKI entities such as CA, RA, repository, subscriber systems, and
   relying party systems.

11. IANA Considerations

   None.

12. Acknowledgments

   The authors would like to thank Geoff Huston for reviewing this
   document, Matt Lepinski for his help with the formatting, and Ron
   Watro for assistance with editing.

13. References

13.1. Normative References

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

   [RFC3280]   Housley, R., Polk, W. Ford, W., Solo, D., ''Internet
         X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate
         Revocation List (CRL) Profile,'' BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.





Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 39]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


   [RFCxxxx]   Seo, K., Watro, R., Kong, D., and Kent, S.,
         ''Certificate Policy for the Resource PKI (RPKI),'' work in
         progress.

   [RFCyyyy]   Huston, G., Michaelson, G., Loomans, R., ''A Profile for
         X.509 PKIX Resource Certificates,'' work in progress.

   [RFCzzzz]   Huston, G., ''A Profile for Algorithms and Key Sizes for
         use in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure,''  work in
         progress.

13.2. Informative References

   [BGP4]   Y. Rekhter, T. Li (editors),  A Border Gateway Protocol 4
         (BGP-4). IETF RFC 1771, March 1995.

   [FIPS]   Federal Information Processing Standards Publication 140-3
         (FIPS-140-3), "Security Requirements for Cryptographic
         Modules", Information Technology Laboratory, National
         Institute of Standards and Technology, work in progress.

   [RSA] Rivest, R., Shamir, A., and Adelman, L. M. 1978. A method for
         obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems.
         Commun. ACM 21, 2 (Feb.), 120-126.

Author's Addresses

   Stephen Kent
   BBN Technologies
   10 Moulton Street
   Cambridge MA 02138
   USA


















Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 40]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


   Phone: +1 (617) 873-3988
   Email: skent@bbn.com

   Derrick Kong
   BBN Technologies
   10 Moulton Street
   Cambridge MA 02138
   USA

   Phone: +1 (617) 873-1951
   Email: dkong@bbn.com

   Karen Seo
   BBN Technologies
   10 Moulton Street
   Cambridge MA 02138
   USA

   Phone: +1 (617) 873-3152
   Email: kseo@bbn.com


Pre-5378 Material Disclaimer

   This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
   Contributions published or made publicly available before November
   10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
   material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
   modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
   Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
   the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
   outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
   not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
   it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
   than English.

Copyright Statement

   Copyright (c) 2010 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


Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 41]


Internet-Draft  Template CPS for an Internet Registry       March 2010


   Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
   warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
















































Kong, Seo & Kent         Expires October 2010                 [Page 42]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.124, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/