draft-ietf-mip6-mn-ident-option-03.txt   rfc4283.txt 
Network Working Group A. Patel Network Working Group A. Patel
Internet-Draft K. Leung Request for Comments: 4283 K. Leung
Expires: March 6, 2006 Cisco Systems Category: Standards Track Cisco Systems
M. Khalil M. Khalil
H. Akhtar H. Akhtar
Nortel Networks Nortel Networks
K. Chowdhury K. Chowdhury
Starent Networks Starent Networks
September 2, 2005 November 2005
Mobile Node Identifier Option for MIPv6
draft-ietf-mip6-mn-ident-option-03
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of 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 Mobile Node Identifier Option for Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6)
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at Status of This Memo
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 6, 2006. This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
Abstract Abstract
Mobile IPv6 defines a new Mobility header which is used by mobile Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) defines a new Mobility header that is used by
nodes, correspondent nodes, and home agents in all messaging related mobile nodes, correspondent nodes, and home agents in all messaging
to the creation and management of bindings. Mobile IPv6 nodes need related to the creation and management of bindings. Mobile IPv6
the capability to identify themselves using an identity other than nodes need the capability to identify themselves using an identity
the default home IP address. Some examples of identifiers include other than the default home IP address. Some examples of identifiers
NAI, FQDN, IMSI, MSISDN, etc. This document defines a new mobility include Network Access Identifier (NAI), Fully Qualified Domain Name
(FQDN), International Mobile Station Identifier (IMSI), and Mobile
Subscriber Number (MSISDN). This document defines a new mobility
option that can be used by Mobile IPv6 entities to identify option that can be used by Mobile IPv6 entities to identify
themselves in messages containing a mobility header. themselves in messages containing a mobility header.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction ....................................................2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Terminology .....................................................3
3. Mobile Node Identifier option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Mobile Node Identifier Option ...................................3
3.1. MN-NAI mobility option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1. MN-NAI Mobility Option .....................................4
3.2. Processing Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2. Processing Considerations ..................................4
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. Security Considerations .........................................4
4.1. General Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.1. General Considerations .....................................4
4.2. MN NAI consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.2. MN-NAI Considerations ......................................4
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5. IANA Considerations .............................................5
6. IPR Disclosure Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. Acknowledgements ................................................5
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 7. Normative References ............................................5
8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 8. Informative Reference ...........................................6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The base specification of Mobile IPv6 [RFC3775] identifies mobility The base specification of Mobile IPv6 [RFC3775] identifies mobility
entities using an IPv6 address. It is essential to have a mechanism entities using an IPv6 address. It is essential to have a mechanism
wherein mobility entities can be identified using other identifiers wherein mobility entities can be identified using other identifiers
(for example, a network access identifier (NAI) [RFC_2486bis], (for example, a Network Access Identifier (NAI) [RFC4282],
International Mobile Station Identifier (IMSI), an application/ International Mobile Station Identifier (IMSI), or an application/
deployment specific opaque identifier etc). deployment specific opaque identifier).
The capability to identify a mobility entity via identifiers other The capability to identify a mobility entity via identifiers other
than the IPv6 address can be leveraged for performing various than the IPv6 address can be leveraged for performing various
functions, eg. functions, for example,
o authentication and authorization using an existing AAA o authentication and authorization using an existing AAA
(Authentication, Authorization and Accounting) infrastructure or (Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting) infrastructure or
via an HLR/AuC (Home Location Register/Authentication Center), via an HLR/AuC (Home Location Register/Authentication Center)
o dynamic allocation of a mobility anchor point, o dynamic allocation of a mobility anchor point
o dynamic allocation of a home address etc. o dynamic allocation of a home address
This document defines an option with subtype number which denotes a This document defines an option with a subtype number that denotes a
specific type of identifier. One instance of subtype, the NAI is specific type of identifier. One instance of subtype, the NAI, is
defined in Section 3.1. It is anticipated that other identifiers defined in Section 3.1. It is anticipated that other identifiers
will be defined for use in the mobility header in the future. will be defined for use in the mobility header in the future.
This option SHOULD be used when IKE/IPsec is not used for protecting This option SHOULD be used when Internet Key Exchange (IKE)/IPsec is
binding update or binding acknowledgements as specified in [RFC3775]. not used for protecting binding updates or binding acknowledgements
It is typically used with authentication option [auth_id]. But this as specified in [RFC3775]. It is typically used with the
option may be used independently. For example, the identifier can authentication option [RFC4285]. But this option may be used
provide accounting and billing services. independently. For example, the identifier can provide accounting
and billing services.
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
3. Mobile Node Identifier option 3. Mobile Node Identifier Option
The Mobile node identifier option is a new optional data field that The Mobile Node Identifier option is a new optional data field that
is carried in the Mobile IPv6 defined messages which includes the is carried in the Mobile IPv6-defined messages that includes the
mobility header. Various forms of identifiers can be used to Mobility header. Various forms of identifiers can be used to
identify a MN. Some examples include a Network Access Identifier identify a Mobile Node (MN). Two examples are a Network Access
(NAI) [RFC_2486bis], an opaque identifier applicable to a particular Identifier (NAI) [RFC4282] and an opaque identifier applicable to a
application, etc. The subtype field in the option defines the particular application. The Subtype field in the option defines the
specific type of identifier. specific type of identifier.
This option can be used in mobility messages containing a mobility This option can be used in mobility messages containing a mobility
header. The subtype field in the option is used to interpret the header. The subtype field in the option is used to interpret the
specific type of identifier. specific type of identifier.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Option Type | Option Length | | Option Type | Option Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Subtype | Identifier ... | Subtype | Identifier ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Option Type: Option Type:
MN-ID-OPTION-TYPE to be defined by IANA. An 8-bit identifier MN-ID-OPTION-TYPE has been assigned value 8 by the IANA. It is
of the type mobility option. an 8-bit identifier of the type mobility option.
Option Length: Option Length:
8-bit unsigned integer, representing the length in octets of 8-bit unsigned integer, representing the length in octets of
the Subtype and Identifier fields. the Subtype and Identifier fields.
Subtype: Subtype:
Subtype field defines the specific type of identifier included Subtype field defines the specific type of identifier included
in the identifier field. in the Identifier field.
Identifier: Identifier:
A variable length identifier of type as specified by the A variable length identifier of type, as specified by the
subtype field of this option. Subtype field of this option.
This option does not have any alignment requirements. This option does not have any alignment requirements.
3.1. MN-NAI mobility option 3.1. MN-NAI Mobility Option
The MN-NAI mobility option uses the general format of the Mobile Node The MN-NAI mobility option uses the general format of the Mobile Node
Identifier option as defined in Section 3. This option uses the Identifier option as defined in Section 3. This option uses the
subtype value of 1. The MN-NAI mobility option is used to identify subtype value of 1. The MN-NAI mobility option is used to identify
the mobile node. the mobile node.
The MN-NAI mobility option uses an identifier of the form user@realm The MN-NAI mobility option uses an identifier of the form user@realm
[RFC_2486bis]. This option MUST be implemented by the entities [RFC4282]. This option MUST be implemented by the entities
implementing this specification. implementing this specification.
3.2. Processing Considerations 3.2. Processing Considerations
The location of the MN identifier option is as follows: When present, The location of the MN Identifier option is as follows: When present,
this option MUST appear before any authentication related option in a this option MUST appear before any authentication-related option in a
message containing a mobility header. message containing a Mobility header.
4. Security Considerations 4. Security Considerations
4.1. General Considerations 4.1. General Considerations
Mobile IPv6 already contains one mechanism for identifying mobile Mobile IPv6 already contains one mechanism for identifying mobile
nodes, the Home Address Option [RFC3775]. As a result, the nodes, the Home Address option [RFC3775]. As a result, the
vulnerabilities of the new option defined in this document are vulnerabilities of the new option defined in this document are
similar to those that already exist for Mobile IPv6. In particular, similar to those that already exist for Mobile IPv6. In particular,
the use of a permanent, stable identifier may compromise the privacy the use of a permanent, stable identifier may compromise the privacy
of the user, making it possible to track a particular device or user of the user, making it possible to track a particular device or user
as it moves through different locations. as it moves through different locations.
4.2. MN NAI consideration 4.2. MN-NAI Considerations
Since a Mobile Node Identifier option Section 3 reveals the home Since the Mobile Node Identifier option described in Section 3
affiliation of a user, it may assist an attacker in determining the reveals the home affiliation of a user, it may assist an attacker in
identity of the user, help the attacker in targeting specific determining the identity of the user, help the attacker in targeting
victims, or assist in further probing of the username space. specific victims, or assist in further probing of the username space.
These vulnerabilities can be addressed through various mechanisms, These vulnerabilities can be addressed through various mechanisms,
such as those discussed below: such as those discussed below:
o Encrypting traffic at link layer such that other users on the same o Encrypting traffic at the link layer, such that other users on the
link do not see the identifiers. This mechanism does not help same link do not see the identifiers. This mechanism does not
against attackers on the rest of the path between the mobile node help against attackers on the rest of the path between the mobile
and its home agent. node and its home agent.
o Encrypting the whole packet, such as when using IPsec to protect o Encrypting the whole packet, such as when using IPsec to protect
the communications with the home agent [RFC3776]. the communications with the home agent [RFC3776].
o Using an authentication mechanism that enables the use of privacy o Using an authentication mechanism that enables the use of privacy
NAIs [RFC_2486bis] or temporary, changing "pseudonyms" as NAIs [RFC4282] or temporary, changing "pseudonyms" as identifiers.
identifiers.
In any case, it should be noted that as the identifier option is only In any case, it should be noted that as the identifier option is only
needed on the first registration at the home agent and subsequent needed on the first registration at the home agent and subsequent
registrations can use the home address, the window of privacy registrations can use the home address, the window of privacy
vulnerability in this document is reduced as compared to the vulnerability in this document is reduced as compared to [RFC3775].
[RFC3775]. In addition, this document is a part of a solution to In addition, this document is a part of a solution to allow dynamic
allow dynamic home addresses to be used. This is an improvement to home addresses to be used. This is an improvement to privacy as
privacy as well, and affects both communications with the home agent well, and it affects both communications with the home agent and the
and the correspondent nodes, both of which have to be told the home correspondent nodes, both of which have to be told the home address.
address.
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
IANA services are required for this document. The values for new The values for new mobility options must be assigned from the Mobile
mobility options must be assigned from the Mobile IPv6 [RFC3775] IPv6 [RFC3775] numbering space.
numbering space.
The values for Mobility Option types MN-ID-OPTION-TYPE as defined in
Section 3 need to be assigned. The suggested value is 7 for the MN-
ID-OPTION-TYPE.
IANA should record a value for this new mobility option. The IANA has assigned the value 8 for the MN-ID-OPTION-TYPE.
In addition, IANA needs to create a new namespace for the subtype In addition, IANA has created a new namespace for the subtype field
field of the Mobile Node Identifier Option. The currently allocated of the Mobile Node Identifier option. The currently allocated values
values are as follows: are as follows:
NAI (defined in this document) [1] NAI (defined in [RFC4282]).
New values for this namespace can be allocated using Standards Action New values for this namespace can be allocated using Standards Action
[RFC2434]. [RFC2434].
6. IPR Disclosure Acknowledgement 6. Acknowledgements
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
7. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Basavaraj Patil for his review and The authors would like to thank Basavaraj Patil for his review and
suggestions on this draft. Thanks to Jari Arkko for review and suggestions on this document. Thanks to Jari Arkko for review and
suggestions regarding security considerations and various other suggestions regarding security considerations and various other
aspects of the document. aspects of the document.
8. Normative References 7. Normative References
[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.
[RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an [RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
October 1998. October 1998.
[RFC3775] Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support [RFC3775] Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility
in IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004. Support in IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004.
[RFC3776] Arkko, J., Devarapalli, V., and F. Dupont, "Using IPsec to [RFC3776] Arkko, J., Devarapalli, V., and F. Dupont, "Using IPsec
Protect Mobile IPv6 Signaling Between Mobile Nodes and to Protect Mobile IPv6 Signaling Between Mobile Nodes
Home Agents", RFC 3776, June 2004. and Home Agents", RFC 3776, June 2004.
[RFC_2486bis] [RFC4282] Aboba, B., Beadles, M., Arkko, J., and P. Eronen, "The
Aboba, et. al., B., "The Network Access Identifier", Network Access Identifier", RFC 4282, November 2005.
draft-ietf-radext-rfc2486bis-03.txt (work in progress),
November 2004.
[auth_id] Patel et. al., A., "Authentication Protocol for Mobile 8. Informative Reference
IPv6", draft-ietf-mip6-mn-ident-option-04.txt (work in
progress), February 2005. [RFC4285] Patel, A., Leung, K., Khalil, M., Akhtar, H., and K.
Chowdhury, "Authentication Protocol for Mobile IPv6",
RFC 4285, November 2005.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Alpesh Patel Alpesh Patel
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
170 W. Tasman Drive 170 W. Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134 San Jose, CA 95134
US US
Phone: +1 408-853-9580 Phone: +1 408-853-9580
Email: alpesh@cisco.com EMail: alpesh@cisco.com
Kent Leung Kent Leung
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
170 W. Tasman Drive 170 W. Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134 San Jose, CA 95134
US US
Phone: +1 408-526-5030 Phone: +1 408-526-5030
Email: kleung@cisco.com EMail: kleung@cisco.com
Mohamed Khalil Mohamed Khalil
Nortel Networks Nortel Networks
2221 Lakeside Blvd. 2221 Lakeside Blvd.
Richardson, TX 75082 Richardson, TX 75082
US US
Phone: +1 972-685-0574 Phone: +1 972-685-0574
Email: mkhalil@nortel.com EMail: mkhalil@nortel.com
Haseeb Akhtar Haseeb Akhtar
Nortel Networks Nortel Networks
2221 Lakeside Blvd. 2221 Lakeside Blvd.
Richardson, TX 75082 Richardson, TX 75082
US US
Phone: +1 972-684-4732 Phone: +1 972-684-4732
Email: haseebak@nortel.com EMail: haseebak@nortel.com
Kuntal Chowdhury Kuntal Chowdhury
Starent Networks Starent Networks
30 International Place 30 International Place
Tewksbury, MA 01876 Tewksbury, MA 01876
US US
Phone: +1 214 550 1416 Phone: +1 214 550 1416
Email: kchowdury@starentnetworks.com EMail: kchowdhury@starentnetworks.com
Intellectual Property Statement Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr. http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
ietf-ipr@ietf.org. ipr@ietf.org.
Disclaimer of Validity
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). This document is subject
to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
Acknowledgment Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society. Internet Society.
 End of changes. 48 change blocks. 
159 lines changed or deleted 128 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.27, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/