draft-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis-01.txt		draft-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis-02.txt
	Host Identity Protocol Heer		Host Identity Protocol Heer
	Internet-Draft Hirschmann Automation and		Internet-Draft Hirschmann Automation and Control
	Intended status: Standards Track Control		Intended status: Standards Track Varjonen
	Expires: April 7, 2014 Varjonen		Expires: December 31, 2015 University of Helsinki
	University of Helsinki		June 29, 2015
	October 4, 2013
	Host Identity Protocol Certificates		Host Identity Protocol Certificates
	draft-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis-01		draft-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis-02
	Abstract		Abstract
	The Certificate (CERT) parameter is a container for digital		The Certificate (CERT) parameter is a container for digital
	certificates. It is used for carrying these certificates in Host		certificates. It is used for carrying these certificates in Host
	Identity Protocol (HIP) control packets. This document specifies the		Identity Protocol (HIP) control packets. This document specifies the
	certificate parameter and the error signaling in case of a failed		certificate parameter and the error signaling in case of a failed
	verification. Additionally, this document specifies the		verification. Additionally, this document specifies the
	representations of Host Identity Tags in X.509 version 3 (v3) and		representations of Host Identity Tags in X.509 version 3 (v3) and
	Simple Public Key Infrastructure (SPKI) certificates.		Simple Public Key Infrastructure (SPKI) certificates.
	The concrete use cases of certificates, including how certificates		The concrete use cases of certificates, including how certificates
	are obtained, requested, and which actions are taken upon successful		are obtained, requested, and which actions are taken upon successful
	or failed verification, are specific to the scenario in which the		or failed verification, are specific to the scenario in which the
	certificates are used. Hence, the definition of these scenario-		certificates are used. Hence, the definition of these scenario-
	specific aspects is left to the documents that use the CERT		specific aspects is left to the documents that use the CERT
	parameter.		parameter.
	This document extends I-D.draft-ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis.		This document extends [RFC7401].
	Status of this Memo		Status of This Memo
	This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the		This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
	provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.		provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on April 7, 2014.		This Internet-Draft will expire on December 31, 2015.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect		carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
	to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must		to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
	include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of		include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
	the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as		the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
	skipping to change at page 2, line 34		skipping to change at page 2, line 34
	outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may		outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
	not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format		not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
	it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other		it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
	than English.		than English.
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	Digital certificates bind pieces of information to a public key by		Digital certificates bind pieces of information to a public key by
	means of a digital signature, and thus, enable the holder of a		means of a digital signature, and thus, enable the holder of a
	private key to generate cryptographically verifiable statements. The		private key to generate cryptographically verifiable statements. The
	Host Identity Protocol (HIP) [I-D.draft-ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis] defines		Host Identity Protocol (HIP) [RFC7401] defines a new cryptographic
	a new cryptographic namespace based on asymmetric cryptography. The		namespace based on asymmetric cryptography. The identity of each
	identity of each host is derived from a public key, allowing hosts to		host is derived from a public key, allowing hosts to digitally sign
	digitally sign data and issue certificates with their private key.		data and issue certificates with their private key. This document
	This document specifies the CERT parameter, which is used to transmit		specifies the CERT parameter, which is used to transmit digital
	digital certificates in HIP. It fills the placeholder specified in		certificates in HIP. It fills the placeholder specified in
	Section 5.2 of [I-D.draft-ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis], and thus, extends		Section 5.2 of [RFC7401], and thus, extends [RFC7401].
	[I-D.draft-ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis].
	1.1. Requirements Language		1.1. Requirements Language
	The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",		The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
	"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and		"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
	"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC		"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC
	2119 [RFC2119].		2119 [RFC2119].
	2. CERT Parameter		2. CERT Parameter
	The CERT parameter is a container for certain types of digital		The CERT parameter is a container for certain types of digital
	certificates. It does not specify any certificate semantics.		certificates. It does not specify any certificate semantics.
	However, it defines supplementary parameters that help HIP hosts to		However, it defines supplementary parameters that help HIP hosts to
	transmit semantically grouped CERT parameters in a more systematic		transmit semantically grouped CERT parameters in a more systematic
	way. The specific use of the CERT parameter for different use cases		way. The specific use of the CERT parameter for different use cases
	is intentionally not discussed in this document. Hence, the use of		is intentionally not discussed in this document. Hence, the use of
	the CERT parameter will be defined in the documents that use the CERT		the CERT parameter will be defined in the documents that use the CERT
	parameter.		parameter.
	The CERT parameter is covered and protected, when present, by the HIP		The CERT parameter is covered and protected, when present, by the HIP
	skipping to change at page 4, line 27		skipping to change at page 4, line 22
	Type 768		Type 768
	Length Length in octets, excluding Type, Length, and Padding		Length Length in octets, excluding Type, Length, and Padding
	Cert group Group ID grouping multiple related CERT parameters		Cert group Group ID grouping multiple related CERT parameters
	Cert count Total count of certificates that are sent, possibly		Cert count Total count of certificates that are sent, possibly
	in several consecutive HIP control packets.		in several consecutive HIP control packets.
	Cert ID The sequence number for this certificate		Cert ID The sequence number for this certificate
	Cert Type Indicates the type of the certificate		Cert Type Indicates the type of the certificate
	Padding Any Padding, if necessary, to make the TLV a multiple		Padding Any Padding, if necessary, to make the TLV a multiple
	of 8 bytes.		of 8 bytes.
	The certificates MUST use the algorithms defined in		The certificates MUST use the algorithms defined in [RFC7401] as the
	[I-D.draft-ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis] as the signature and hash		signature and hash algorithms.
	algorithms.
	The following certificate types are defined:		The following certificate types are defined:
	+--------------------------------+-------------+		+--------------------------------+-------------+
	| Cert format | Type number |		| Cert format | Type number |
	+--------------------------------+-------------+		+--------------------------------+-------------+
	| Reserved | 0 |		| Reserved | 0 |
	| X.509 v3 | 1 |		| X.509 v3 | 1 |
	| SPKI | 2 |		| SPKI | 2 |
	| Hash and URL of X.509 v3 | 3 |		| Hash and URL of X.509 v3 | 3 |
	| Hash and URL of SPKI | 4 |		| Hash and URL of SPKI | 4 |
	| LDAP URL of X.509 v3 | 5 |		| LDAP URL of X.509 v3 | 5 |
	| LDAP URL of SPKI | 6 |		| LDAP URL of SPKI | 6 |
	| Distinguished Name of X.509 v3 | 7 |		| Distinguished Name of X.509 v3 | 7 |
	| Distinguished Name of SPKI | 8 |		| Distinguished Name of SPKI | 8 |
	skipping to change at page 6, line 13		skipping to change at page 5, line 42
	and subject in the X.509 v3 extension alternative names.		and subject in the X.509 v3 extension alternative names.
	Format of X509v3 extensions:		Format of X509v3 extensions:
	X509v3 Issuer Alternative Name:		X509v3 Issuer Alternative Name:
	IP Address:hit-of-issuer		IP Address:hit-of-issuer
	X509v3 Subject Alternative Name:		X509v3 Subject Alternative Name:
	IP Address:hit-of-subject		IP Address:hit-of-subject
	Example X509v3 extensions:		Example X509v3 extensions:
	X509v3 Issuer Alternative Name:		X509v3 Issuer Alternative Name:
	IP Address:2001:14:6cf:fae7:bb79:bf78:7d64:c056		IP Address:2001:24:6cf:fae7:bb79:bf78:7d64:c056
	X509v3 Subject Alternative Name:		X509v3 Subject Alternative Name:
	IP Address:2001:1C:5a14:26de:a07c:385b:de35:60e3		IP Address:2001:2C:5a14:26de:a07c:385b:de35:60e3
	Appendix B shows a full example X.509 v3 certificate with HIP		Appendix B shows a full example X.509 v3 certificate with HIP
	content.		content.
	As another example, consider a managed Public Key Infrastructure		As another example, consider a managed Public Key Infrastructure
	(PKI) environment in which the peers have certificates that are		(PKI) environment in which the peers have certificates that are
	anchored in (potentially different) managed trust chains. In this		anchored in (potentially different) managed trust chains. In this
	scenario, the certificates issued to HIP hosts are signed by		scenario, the certificates issued to HIP hosts are signed by
	intermediate Certification Authorities (CAs) up to a root CA. In		intermediate Certification Authorities (CAs) up to a root CA. In
	this example, the managed PKI environment is neither HIP aware, nor		this example, the managed PKI environment is neither HIP aware, nor
	skipping to change at page 7, line 5		skipping to change at page 6, line 32
	hosts, HITs need to be enclosed within the certificates. HITs can		hosts, HITs need to be enclosed within the certificates. HITs can
	represent an issuer, a subject, or both. In the following, we define		represent an issuer, a subject, or both. In the following, we define
	the representation of those identifiers for SPKI given as		the representation of those identifiers for SPKI given as
	S-expressions. Note that the S-expressions are only the human-		S-expressions. Note that the S-expressions are only the human-
	readable representation of SPKI certificates. Full HIs are presented		readable representation of SPKI certificates. Full HIs are presented
	in the public key sequences of SPKI certificates.		in the public key sequences of SPKI certificates.
	As an example, the Host Identity Tag of a host is expressed as		As an example, the Host Identity Tag of a host is expressed as
	follows:		follows:
	Format: (hash hit hit-of-host)		Format: (hash hit hit-of-host)
	Example: (hash hit 2001:13:724d:f3c0:6ff0:33c2:15d8:5f50)		Example: (hash hit 2001:23:724d:f3c0:6ff0:33c2:15d8:5f50)
	Appendix A shows a full example of a SPKI certificate with HIP		Appendix A shows a full example of a SPKI certificate with HIP
	content.		content.
	5. Revocation of Certificates		5. Revocation of Certificates
	Revocation of X.509 v3 certificates is handled as defined in Section		Revocation of X.509 v3 certificates is handled as defined in
	5 of [RFC5280]. Revocation of SPKI certificates is handled as		Section 5 of [RFC5280]. Revocation of SPKI certificates is handled
	defined in Section 5 of [RFC2693].		as defined in Section 5 of [RFC2693].
	6. Error Signaling		6. Error Signaling
	If the Initiator does not send the certificate that the Responder		If the Initiator does not send the certificate that the Responder
	requires, the Responder may take actions (e.g. reject the		requires, the Responder may take actions (e.g. reject the
	connection). The Responder MAY signal this to the Initiator by		connection). The Responder MAY signal this to the Initiator by
	sending a HIP NOTIFY message with NOTIFICATION parameter error type		sending a HIP NOTIFY message with NOTIFICATION parameter error type
	CREDENTIALS_REQUIRED.		CREDENTIALS_REQUIRED.
	If the verification of a certificate fails, a verifier MAY signal		If the verification of a certificate fails, a verifier MAY signal
	skipping to change at page 7, line 47		skipping to change at page 7, line 27
	INVALID_CERTIFICATE 50		INVALID_CERTIFICATE 50
	Sent in response to a failed verification of a certificate.		Sent in response to a failed verification of a certificate.
	Notification Data MAY contain n groups of 2 octets (n calculated		Notification Data MAY contain n groups of 2 octets (n calculated
	from the NOTIFICATION parameter length), in order Cert group and		from the NOTIFICATION parameter length), in order Cert group and
	Cert ID of the CERT parameter that caused the failure.		Cert ID of the CERT parameter that caused the failure.
	7. IANA Considerations		7. IANA Considerations
	This document defines the CERT parameter for the Host Identity		This document defines the CERT parameter for the Host Identity
	Protocol [I-D.draft-ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis]. This parameter is defined		Protocol [RFC7401]. This parameter is defined in Section 2 with type
	in Section 2 with type 768. The parameter type number is also		768. The parameter type number is also defined in [RFC7401].
	defined in [I-D.draft-ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis].
	The CERT parameter has an 8-bit unsigned integer field for different		The CERT parameter has an 8-bit unsigned integer field for different
	certificate types, for which IANA is to create and maintain a new		certificate types, for which IANA is to create and maintain a new
	sub-registry entitled "HIP certificate types" under the "Host		sub-registry entitled "HIP certificate types" under the "Host
	Identity Protocol (HIP) Parameters". Initial values for the		Identity Protocol (HIP) Parameters". Initial values for the
	Certificate type registry are given in Section 2. New values for the		Certificate type registry are given in Section 2. New values for the
	Certificate types from the unassigned space are assigned through IETF		Certificate types from the unassigned space are assigned through IETF
	Review.		Review.
	In Section 6, this document defines two new types for the "NOTIFY		In Section 6, this document defines two new types for the "NOTIFY
	skipping to change at page 8, line 43		skipping to change at page 8, line 19
	[RFC2693] and for X.509 v3 in [RFC5280].		[RFC2693] and for X.509 v3 in [RFC5280].
	9. Acknowledgements		9. Acknowledgements
	The authors would like to thank A. Keranen, D. Mattes, M. Komu and T.		The authors would like to thank A. Keranen, D. Mattes, M. Komu and T.
	Henderson for the fruitful conversations on the subject. D. Mattes		Henderson for the fruitful conversations on the subject. D. Mattes
	most notably contributed the non-HIP aware use case in Section 3.		most notably contributed the non-HIP aware use case in Section 3.
	10. Normative References		10. Normative References
	[I-D.draft-ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis]
	Moskowitz, R., Heer, T., Jokela, P., and T. Henderson,
	"Host Identity Protocol Version 2 (HIPv2)",
	<draft-ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis-13>.
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
	[RFC2693] Ellison, C., Frantz, B., Lampson, B., Rivest, R., Thomas,		[RFC2693] Ellison, C., Frantz, B., Lampson, B., Rivest, R., Thomas,
	B., and T. Ylonen, "SPKI Certificate Theory", RFC 2693,		B., and T. Ylonen, "SPKI Certificate Theory", RFC 2693,
	September 1999.		September 1999.
	[RFC4514] Zeilenga, K., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol		[RFC4514] Zeilenga, K., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
	(LDAP): String Representation of Distinguished Names",		(LDAP): String Representation of Distinguished Names", RFC
	RFC 4514, June 2006.		4514, June 2006.
	[RFC4516] Smith, M. and T. Howes, "Lightweight Directory Access		[RFC4516] Smith, M. and T. Howes, "Lightweight Directory Access
	Protocol (LDAP): Uniform Resource Locator", RFC 4516,		Protocol (LDAP): Uniform Resource Locator", RFC 4516, June
	June 2006.		2006.
	[RFC4843] Nikander, P., Laganier, J., and F. Dupont, "An IPv6 Prefix		[RFC4843] Nikander, P., Laganier, J., and F. Dupont, "An IPv6 Prefix
	for Overlay Routable Cryptographic Hash Identifiers		for Overlay Routable Cryptographic Hash Identifiers
	(ORCHID)", RFC 4843, April 2007.		(ORCHID)", RFC 4843, April 2007.
	[RFC5280] Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S.,		[RFC5280] Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S.,
	Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key		Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key
	Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List		Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List
	(CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, May 2008.		(CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, May 2008.
	[RFC5996] Kaufman, C., Hoffman, P., Nir, Y., and P. Eronen,		[RFC5996] Kaufman, C., Hoffman, P., Nir, Y., and P. Eronen,
	"Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)",		"Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)", RFC
	RFC 5996, September 2010.		5996, September 2010.
	[X.690] ITU-T, "Recommendation X.690 (2002) | ISO/IEC 8825-1:2002,		[RFC7401] Moskowitz, R., Heer, T., Jokela, P., and T. Henderson,
	Information Technology - ASN.1 encoding rules:		"Host Identity Protocol Version 2 (HIPv2)", RFC 7401,
	Specification of Basic Encoding Rules (BER), Canonical		April 2015.
	Encoding Rules (CER) and Distinguished Encoding Rules
	(DER)", July 2002.		[X.690] ITU-T, , "Recommendation X.690 (2002) | ISO/IEC
			8825-1:2002, Information Technology - ASN.1 encoding
			rules: Specification of Basic Encoding Rules (BER),
			Canonical Encoding Rules (CER) and Distinguished Encoding
			Rules (DER)", July 2002.
	Appendix A. SPKI certificate example		Appendix A. SPKI certificate example
	This section shows an SPKI certificate with encoded HITs. The		This section shows an SPKI certificate with encoded HITs. The
	example has been indented for readability.		example has been indented for readability.
	(sequence		(sequence
	(public_key		(public_key
	(rsa-pkcs1-sha1		(rsa-pkcs1-sha1
	(e #010001#)		(e #010001#)
	(n |yDwznOwX0w+zvQbpWoTnfWrUPLKW2NFrpXbsIcH/QBSLb		(n |yDwznOwX0w+zvQbpWoTnfWrUPLKW2NFrpXbsIcH/QBSLb
	k1RKTZhLasFwvtSHAjqh220W8gRiQAGIqKplyrDEqSrJp		k1RKTZhLasFwvtSHAjqh220W8gRiQAGIqKplyrDEqSrJp
	OdIsHIQ8BQhJAyILWA1Sa6f5wAnWozDfgdXoKLNdT8ZNB		OdIsHIQ8BQhJAyILWA1Sa6f5wAnWozDfgdXoKLNdT8ZNB
	mzluPiw4ozc78p6MHElH75Hm3yHaWxT+s83M=|		mzluPiw4ozc78p6MHElH75Hm3yHaWxT+s83M=|
	)		)
	)		)
	)		)
	(cert		(cert
	(issuer		(issuer
	(hash hit 2001:15:2453:698a:9aa:253a:dcb5:981e)		(hash hit 2001:25:2453:698a:9aa:253a:dcb5:981e)
	)		)
	(subject		(subject
	(hash hit 2001:12:ccd6:4715:72a3:2ab1:77e4:4acc)		(hash hit 2001:22:ccd6:4715:72a3:2ab1:77e4:4acc)
	)		)
	(not-before "2011-01-12_13:43:09")		(not-before "2011-01-12_13:43:09")
	(not-after "2011-01-22_13:43:09")		(not-after "2011-01-22_13:43:09")
	)		)
	(signature		(signature
	(hash sha1 |h5fC8HUMATTtK0cjYqIgeN3HCIMA|)		(hash sha1 |h5fC8HUMATTtK0cjYqIgeN3HCIMA|)
	|u8NTRutINI/AeeZgN6bngjvjYPtVahvY7MhGfenTpT7MCgBy		|u8NTRutINI/AeeZgN6bngjvjYPtVahvY7MhGfenTpT7MCgBy
	NoZglqH5Cy2vH6LrQFYWx0MjWoYwHKimEuBKCNd4TK6hrCyAI		NoZglqH5Cy2vH6LrQFYWx0MjWoYwHKimEuBKCNd4TK6hrCyAI
	CIDJAZ70TyKXgONwDNWPOmcc3lFmsih8ezkoBseFWHqRGISIm		CIDJAZ70TyKXgONwDNWPOmcc3lFmsih8ezkoBseFWHqRGISIm
	MLdeaMciP4lVfxPY2AQKdMrBc=|		MLdeaMciP4lVfxPY2AQKdMrBc=|
	skipping to change at page 11, line 31		skipping to change at page 10, line 25
	fa:98:87:0d:22:ab:d8:6a:61:74:a9:ee:0b:ae:cd:		fa:98:87:0d:22:ab:d8:6a:61:74:a9:ee:0b:ae:cd:
	18:6f:05:ab:69:66:42:46:00:a2:c0:0c:3a:28:67:		18:6f:05:ab:69:66:42:46:00:a2:c0:0c:3a:28:67:
	09:cc:52:27:da:79:3e:67:d7:d8:d0:7c:f1:a1:26:		09:cc:52:27:da:79:3e:67:d7:d8:d0:7c:f1:a1:26:
	fa:38:8f:73:f5:b0:20:c6:f2:0b:7d:77:43:aa:c7:		fa:38:8f:73:f5:b0:20:c6:f2:0b:7d:77:43:aa:c7:
	98:91:7e:1e:04:31:0d:ca:94:55:20:c4:4f:ba:b1:		98:91:7e:1e:04:31:0d:ca:94:55:20:c4:4f:ba:b1:
	df:d4:61:9d:dd:b9:b5:47:94:6c:06:91:69:30:42:		df:d4:61:9d:dd:b9:b5:47:94:6c:06:91:69:30:42:
	9c:0a:8b:e3:00:ce:49:ab:e3		9c:0a:8b:e3:00:ce:49:ab:e3
	Exponent: 65537 (0x10001)		Exponent: 65537 (0x10001)
	X509v3 extensions:		X509v3 extensions:
	X509v3 Issuer Alternative Name:		X509v3 Issuer Alternative Name:
	IP Address:2001:13:8d83:41c5:dc9f:38ed:e742:7281		IP Address:2001:23:8d83:41c5:dc9f:38ed:e742:7281
	X509v3 Subject Alternative Name:		X509v3 Subject Alternative Name:
	IP Address:2001:1c:6e02:d3e0:9b90:8417:673e:99db		IP Address:2001:2c:6e02:d3e0:9b90:8417:673e:99db
	Signature Algorithm: sha1WithRSAEncryption		Signature Algorithm: sha1WithRSAEncryption
	83:68:b4:38:63:a6:ae:57:68:e2:4d:73:5d:8f:11:e4:ba:30:		83:68:b4:38:63:a6:ae:57:68:e2:4d:73:5d:8f:11:e4:ba:30:
	a0:19:ca:86:22:e9:6b:e9:36:96:af:95:bd:e8:02:b9:72:2f:		a0:19:ca:86:22:e9:6b:e9:36:96:af:95:bd:e8:02:b9:72:2f:
	30:a2:62:ac:b2:fa:3d:25:c5:24:fd:8d:32:aa:01:4f:a5:8a:		30:a2:62:ac:b2:fa:3d:25:c5:24:fd:8d:32:aa:01:4f:a5:8a:
	f5:06:52:56:0a:86:55:39:2b:ee:7a:7b:46:14:d7:5d:15:82:		f5:06:52:56:0a:86:55:39:2b:ee:7a:7b:46:14:d7:5d:15:82:
	4d:74:06:ca:b7:8c:54:c1:6b:33:7f:77:82:d8:95:e1:05:ca:		4d:74:06:ca:b7:8c:54:c1:6b:33:7f:77:82:d8:95:e1:05:ca:
	e2:0d:22:1d:86:fc:1c:c4:a4:cf:c6:bc:ab:ec:b8:2a:1e:4b:		e2:0d:22:1d:86:fc:1c:c4:a4:cf:c6:bc:ab:ec:b8:2a:1e:4b:
	04:7e:49:9c:8f:9d:98:58:9c:63:c5:97:b5:41:94:f7:ef:93:		04:7e:49:9c:8f:9d:98:58:9c:63:c5:97:b5:41:94:f7:ef:93:
	57:29		57:29
	Appendix C. Change log		Appendix C. Change log
	Contents of draft-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis-00:		Contents of draft-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis-00:
	o RFC6253 was submitted as draft-RFC.		o RFC6253 was submitted as draft-RFC.
	Authors' Addresses		Changes from version 01 to 02:
			o Updated the references.
			Authors' Addresses
	Tobias Heer		Tobias Heer
	Hirschmann Automation and Control		Hirschmann Automation and Control
	Stuttgarter Strasse 45-51		Stuttgarter Strasse 45-51
	Neckartenzlingen 72654		Neckartenzlingen 72654
	Germany		Germany
	Email: tobias.heer@belden.com		Email: tobias.heer@belden.com
	Samu Varjonen		Samu Varjonen
	University of Helsinki		University of Helsinki
End of changes. 26 change blocks.
	54 lines changed or deleted		51 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/