--- 1/draft-ietf-rohc-ikev2-extensions-hcoipsec-03.txt 2007-10-09 17:12:07.000000000 +0200 +++ 2/draft-ietf-rohc-ikev2-extensions-hcoipsec-04.txt 2007-10-09 17:12:07.000000000 +0200 @@ -1,21 +1,21 @@ Network Working Group J. Pezeshki Internet-Draft E. Ertekin -Expires: February 28, 2008 R. Jasani - C. Christou +Intended status: Experimental R. Jasani +Expires: April 10, 2008 C. Christou Booz Allen Hamilton - August 27, 2007 + October 8, 2007 IKEv2 Extensions to Support Robust Header Compression over IPsec (RoHCoIPsec) - draft-ietf-rohc-ikev2-extensions-hcoipsec-03 + draft-ietf-rohc-ikev2-extensions-hcoipsec-04 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 @@ -26,48 +26,46 @@ 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 February 28, 2008. + This Internet-Draft will expire on April 10, 2008. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). Abstract When using Robust Header Compression (RoHC [ROHC]) in conjunction - with IPsec [IPSEC] (i.e. [ROHCOIPSEC]) a mechanism is needed to + with IPsec [IPSEC] (i.e. [RoHCOIPSEC]) a mechanism is needed to negotiate RoHC configuration parameters between end-points prior to operation. Internet Key Exchange (IKE) is a mechanism which can be leveraged to handle these negotiations. This document specifies extensions to Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2 [IKEV2]) that will allow RoHC and its associated configuration parameters to be negotiated for IPsec security associations (SAs). Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. RoHC Channel Negotiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. Negotiation of RoHC Channel Parameters . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + 6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 9 1. Introduction Increased packet header overhead due to IPsec protection can result in inefficient utilization of bandwidth. Coupling RoHC with IPsec offers an efficient way to transfer protected IP traffic. For proper RoHCoIPsec [ROHCOIPSEC] operation, RoHC requires @@ -104,52 +102,42 @@ RoHC configuration parameters will be negotiated at either the establishment or rekeying of a Child SA. Specifically, a Notify payload will be used during the IKE_AUTH and CREATE_CHILD_SA exchanges to negotiate the RoHCoIPsec session. The Notify payload sent by the initiator will contain the configuration parameters for the RoHC scheme. Upon receipt of the initiator's request, the responder will either ignore the payload (if it doesn't support RoHC or the proposed parameters) or respond with a Notify payload that contains the accepted RoHC channel parameters. These accepted - parameters are a subset of the parameters proposed by the initiator, + parameters are subset of the parameters proposed by the initiator, and the parameters supported by the responder (e.g. if the initiator proposes a MAX_CID value of 15, but the responder only supports a MAX_CID value of 13, the responder will respond with a value of 13, which is supported by both parties). Note that only one Notify payload is used to convey RoHC parameters per exchange. If multiple Notify payloads relaying RoHC parameters are received by the responder, all but the first such Notify payload must be dropped. A new Notify Message Type value, denoted ROHC_SUPPORTED, will be added to indicate that the Notify payload is conveying RoHC channel - parameters. Additionally, the fields of the Notify payload (as + parameters. Additionally, several fields of the Notify payload (as defined in [IKEV2]) are set as follows: - Next Payload (1 octet) - If the current payload is the last in the message, then this field - will be 0. The Next Payload value of the previous payload must be - 41, indicating that this current payload is a Notify Payload. - Critical (1 bit) - This value is set to zero, indicating that the recipient must skip + This value is set to zero to indicate that the recipient must skip this payload if it does not understand the payload type code in the Next Payload field of the previous payload. RESERVED (7 bits) Must be sent as zero, and must be ignored on receipt. - Payload Length (2 octets) - Length in octets of the current payload, including the generic - payload header (the generic payload header is defined in [IKEV2], - section 3.2). - Protocol ID (1 octet) Since the RoHC parameters are set at SA creation, and thus do not relate to an existing SA, this field must be set to zero. SPI Size (1 octet) This value must be set to zero, since no SPI is applicable (RoHC parameters are set at SA creation, thus the SPI has not been defined). Notify Message Type (2 octets) @@ -201,90 +189,94 @@ MAX_HEADER (2 octets) The largest header size in octets that may be compressed. Suggested value: 168 octets Note: The MAX_HEADER parameter is not used for all RoHC profiles. If none of the RoHC profiles require this field, this value is ignored. PROFILES - The set of profiles to be enabled for the RoHC process. This - field may be set to one (or multiple) values listed in 'ROHC - profile identifiers' [ROHCPROF]. + The set of profiles to be enabled for the RoHC process. Profiles + are further detailed in [ROHC]. In addition, several common + profiles are defined in [ROHCPROF]. These 16-bit profile + identifiers are to be sent in network byte order. Note: When a pair of SAs are created (one in each direction), the RoHC channel parameter FEEDBACK_FOR is set implicitly to the other SA of the pair (i.e. the SA pointing in the reverse direction). 3. Security Considerations The RoHC parameters negotiated via IKEv2 do not add any new vulnerabilities beyond those associated with the normal operation of IKEv2. 4. IANA Considerations This document defines a new Notify Message (Status Type). Therefore, IANA is requested to allocate one value from the IKEv2 Notify Message - registry to indicate ROHC_SUPPORTED. + registry to indicate ROHC_SUPPORTED. Note that, since this Notify + Message is a Status Type, values ranging from 0 to 16383 must not be + allocated for ROHC_SUPPORTED. 5. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Mr. Sean O'Keeffe, Mr. James Kohler, and Ms. Linda Noone of the Department of Defense, as well as Mr. Rich Espy of OPnet for their contributions and support in the development of this document. The authors would also like to thank Mr. Tero Kivinen for providing his technical expertise for this document. In addition, the authors would like to thank the following for their numerous reviews and comments to this document: o Dr. Stephen Kent o Dr. Carsten Bormann o Mr. Lars-Erik Jonnson o Mr. Pasi Eronen Finally, the authors would also like to thank Mr. Tom Conkle, Ms. Michele Casey, and Mr. Etzel Brower. -6. References - -6.1. Normative References +6. Normative References [ROHC] Bormann, C., Burmeister, C., Degermark, M., Fukushima, H., Hannu, H., Jonsson, L., Hakenberg, R., Koren, T., Le, K., Liu, Z., Martensson, A., Miyazaki, A., Svanbro, K., Wiebke, T., Yoshimura, T., and H. Zheng, "RObust Header Compression (ROHC): Framework and four profiles: RTP, UDP, ESP, and uncompressed", RFC 3095, July 2001. [IPSEC] Kent, S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol", RFC 4301, December 2005. + [RoHCOIPSEC] + Ertekin, E., Christou, C., and R. Jasani, "Integration of + Robust Header Compression over IPsec Security + Associations", work in progress , June 2006. + [IKEV2] Kaufman, C., "Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol", RFC 4306, December 2005. - [ROHCPROF] - IANA, ""RObust Header Compression (ROHC) Profile - Identifiers", IANA registry at: - http://www.iana.org/assignments/rohc-pro-ids", July 2007. + [ROHCPPP] Bormann, C., "Robust Header Compression (ROHC) over PPP", + RFC 3241, April 2002. -6.2. Informative References + [AH] Kent, S., "IP Authentication Header", RFC 4302, + December 2005. - [ROHCOIPSEC] - Ertekin, E., Christou, C., Jasani, R., and J. Pezeshki, - "Integration of Robust Header Compression (ROHC) over - IPsec Security Associations", work in progress , - August 2007. + [ESP] Kent, S., "IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)", + RFC 4303, December 2005. - [ROHCPPP] Bormann, C., "Robust Header Compression (ROHC) over PPP", - RFC 3241, April 2002. + [ROHCPROF] + Pelletier, G. and K. Sandlund, "RObust Header Compression + Version 2 (RoHCv2): Profiles for RTP, UDP, IP, ESP and UDP + Lite", www.iana.org/assignments/ROHC-pro-ids , May 2007. Authors' Addresses Jonah Pezeshki Booz Allen Hamilton 13200 Woodland Park Dr. Herndon, VA 20171 US Email: pezeshki_jonah@bah.com