--- 1/draft-ietf-sidr-publication-06.txt 2015-09-25 14:15:00.038171158 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-sidr-publication-07.txt 2015-09-25 14:15:00.070171937 -0700 @@ -1,21 +1,21 @@ Network Working Group S. Weiler -Internet-Draft SPARTA, Inc. +Internet-Draft Parsons Intended status: Standards Track A. Sonalker -Expires: August 29, 2015 Battelle Memorial Institute +Expires: March 28, 2016 Battelle Memorial Institute R. Austein Dragon Research Labs - February 25, 2015 + September 25, 2015 A Publication Protocol for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) - draft-ietf-sidr-publication-06 + draft-ietf-sidr-publication-07 Abstract This document defines a protocol for publishing Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) objects. Even though the RPKI will have many participants issuing certificates and creating other objects, it is operationally useful to consolidate the publication of those objects. This document provides the protocol for doing so. Status of This Memo @@ -26,21 +26,21 @@ Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." - This Internet-Draft will expire on August 29, 2015. + This Internet-Draft will expire on March 28, 2016. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2015 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 @@ -49,39 +49,45 @@ include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Protocol Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. Common XML Message Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 2.2. Publication and Withdrawal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 2.3. Listing the repository . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 2.4. Error handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 2.5. XML Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 3. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 3.1. Query, No Existing Object . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 3.2. Query, Overwriting Existing Object . . . . . . 9 - 3.3. Reply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 2.2. General Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 2.3. Publication and Withdrawal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 2.4. Listing the repository . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 2.5. Error handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 2.6. Error Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + 2.7. XML Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 3. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 3.1. Query, No Existing Object . . . . . . . . . . 10 + 3.2. Query, Overwriting Existing Object . . . . . . 10 + 3.3. Reply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3.4. Query . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 - 3.5. Reply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 - 3.6. With Text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 - 3.7. Without Text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 - 4. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 - 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 3.5. Reply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 + 3.6. With Optional Elements . . . . . . . . . 11 + 3.7. Without Optional Elements . . . . . . . . 11 + 3.8. Error Handling With Multi-Element Queries . . . . . . . . 11 + 3.8.1. Multi-Element Query . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 + 3.8.2. Successful Multi-Element Response . . . . . . . . . . 12 + 3.8.3. Failure Multi-Element Response . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 4. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 + 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 + 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 1. Introduction This document assumes a working knowledge of the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), which is intended to support improved routing security on the Internet. [RFC6480] In order to make participation in the RPKI easier, it is helpful to have a few consolidated repositories for RPKI objects, thus saving every participant from the cost of maintaining a new service. @@ -137,21 +143,21 @@ object as the body. The server's response will similarly be the body of the response with a content type of "application/rpki- publication". The content of the POST and the server's response will be a well- formed Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) [RFC5652] object with OID = 1.2.840.113549.1.7.2 as described in Section 3.1 of [RFC6492]. 2.1. Common XML Message Format - The XML schema for this protocol is below in Section 2.5. The basic + The XML schema for this protocol is below in Section 2.7. The basic XML message format looks like this: , , or . - A reply PDU may be one of four types: , , , or . + A reply PDU may be one of four types: , , + , or . Each of these PDUs may include an optional tag to facilitate bulk operation. If a tag is set in a query PDU, the corresponding - reply(s) MUST have the tag attribute set to the same value. + reply(s) or error(s) MUST have the tag attribute set to the same + value. -2.2. Publication and Withdrawal +2.2. General Operation + + Processing of a query message is handled atomically: either the + entire query succeeds or none of it does. When a query message + contains multiple PDUs, failure of any PDU may require the server to + roll back actions triggered by earlier PDUs. + +2.3. Publication and Withdrawal The publication protocol uses a common message format to request publication of any RPKI object. This format was chosen specifically to allow this protocol to accommodate new types of RPKI objects without needing changes to this protocol. Both the and PDUs have a payload of an optional tag and a URI. The query also contains the DER object to be published, encoded in Base64. @@ -194,81 +208,144 @@ specified repository URI. For PDUs, the hash is mandatory, as this operation makes no sense if there is no existing object to withdraw. For PDUs, the hash MUST be present if the publication operation is overwriting an existing object, and MUST be omitted if this publication operation is writing to a new URI where no prior object exists. Presence of an object when no hash attribute is specified is an error, as is absence of the hash attribute or an incorrect hash value when an object is present. Any such errors MUST be reported using the PDU. - The current hash algorithm is SHA-256 [SHS], to simplify comparison - of publication protocol hashes with RPKI manifest hashes. + The hash algorithm is SHA-256 [SHS], to simplify comparison of + publication protocol hashes with RPKI manifest hashes. The intent behind the hash attribute is to allow the client and server to detect any disagreements about the effect that a or PDU will have on the repository. Note that every publish and withdraw action requires a new manifest, thus every publish or withdraw action will involve at least two objects. -2.3. Listing the repository +2.4. Listing the repository The operation allows the client to ask the server for a complete listing of objects which the server believes the client has published. This is intended primarily to allow the client to recover upon detecting (probably via use of the "hash" attribute, see - Section 2.2) that they have somehow lost synchronization. + Section 2.3) that they have somehow lost synchronization. The query consists of a single PDU. The reply consists of zero or more PDUs, one per object published in this repository by this client, each PDU conveying the URI and hash of one published object. -2.4. Error handling +2.5. Error handling Errors are handled at two levels. - Since all messages in this protocol are conveyed over HTTP - connections, basic errors are indicated via the HTTP response code. - 4xx and 5xx responses indicate that something bad happened. Errors - that make it impossible to decode a query or encode a response are - handled in this way. + Errors that make it impossible to decode a query or encode a response + are handled at the HTTP layer. 4xx and 5xx HTTP response codes + indicate that something bad happened. - Where possible, errors result in an XML PDU which + In all other cases, errors result in an XML PDU which takes the place of the expected protocol response PDU. Like the rest of this protocol, PDUs are CMS-signed XML messages and thus can be archived to provide an audit trail. PDUs only appear in replies, never in queries. - Like all other PDUs in this protocol, the PDU - includes a "tag" attribute to assist in matching the error with a - particular query when using batching. It is optional to set the tag - on queries but, if set on the query, it MUST be set on the reply or - error. + Like all other reply PDUs, if a "tag" attribute was set on the query + that generated the error, the PDU MUST have its tag + attribute set to the same value. The error itself is conveyed in the error_code attribute. The value of this attribute is a token indicating the specific error that occurred. - The body of the element itself is an optional text - string; if present, this is debugging information. + The body of the element contains two sub-elements: -2.5. XML Schema + 1. An optional text element , which if present, + contains a text string with debugging information intended for + human consumption. + + 2. An optional element , which, if present, contains a + verbatim copy of the query PDU whose failure triggered the + PDU. The quoted element must be syntactically + valid. + + The position of a element in a reply corresponds to + the point in processing the query message where the error occurred. + In the simple case of a query message containing only a single + element, the element will be the only element in the + reply. If, however, the query message contains more than one + element, the element may be preceeded by normal + responses indicating operations that would have succeeded. + + There are several ways that a client can match up elements in a + response message with the corresponding elements in the query + message: + + o For a one-element query, this is trivial. + + o For multi-element queries, the simplest way of matching resposes + uses the optional tag attribute. The protocol requires tags from + query elements to be copied into reply elements, so simply giving + each query element a unique tag will suffice. + + o If for some reason the client implementation is not able or + willing to use unique tags within a multi-element query message, + the client can still match queries to responses by counting + elements in the reply message. This approach is not recommended. + + See Section 3.8 for examples of a multi-element query and responses. + +2.6. Error Codes + + These are the defined error codes as well as some discussion of each. + Text similar to these descriptions may be sent in an + element to help explain the error encountered. + + permission_failure: Client does not have permission to update this + URI. + + bad_cms_signature: Bad CMS signature. + + object_already_present: An object is already present at this URI, + yet a hash attribute was not specified. A hash attribute must be + specified when overwriting or deleting an object. Perhaps client + and server are out of sync? + + no_object_present: There is no object present at this URI, yet a + hash attribute was specified. Perhaps client and server are out + of sync? + + no_object_matching_hash The hash attribute supplied does not match + the hash attribute of the object at this URI. Perhaps client and + server are out of sync? + + consistency_problem: Server detected an update that looks like it + will cause a consistency problem (e.g. an object was deleted, but + the manifest was not updated). Note that a server is not required + to make such checks. Indeed, it may be unwise for a server to do + so. This error code just provides a way for the server to explain + its (in-)action. + + other_error: A meteor fell on the server. + +2.7. XML Schema The following is a RelaxNG compact form schema describing the Publication Protocol. - # $Id: rpki-publication.rnc 3171 2015-02-26 00:09:05Z sra $ + # $Id: rpki-publication.rnc 3407 2015-09-25 21:05:28Z sra $ # RelaxNG schema for RPKI publication protocol. default namespace = "http://www.hactrn.net/uris/rpki/publication-spec/" # This is version 3 of the protocol. version = "3" # Top level PDU is either a query or a reply. @@ -300,21 +378,27 @@ # Publication URIs. uri = attribute uri { xsd:anyURI { maxLength="4096" } } # Digest of an existing object (hexadecimal). hash = attribute hash { xsd:string { pattern = "[0-9a-fA-F]+" } } # Error codes. - error = xsd:token { maxLength="1024" } + error |= "permission_failure" + error |= "bad_cms_signature" + error |= "object_already_present" + error |= "no_object_present" + error |= "no_object_matching_hash" + error |= "consistency_problem" + error |= "other_error" # element publish_query = element publish { tag?, uri, hash?, base64 } publish_reply = element publish { tag?, uri } # element withdraw_query = element withdraw { tag?, uri, hash } withdraw_reply = element withdraw { tag?, uri } @@ -322,158 +406,223 @@ # element list_query = element list { tag? } list_reply = element list { tag?, uri, hash } # element error_reply = element report_error { tag?, attribute error_code { error }, - xsd:string { maxLength="512000" }? + element error_text { xsd:string { maxLength="512000" }}?, + element failed_pdu { query_elt }? } 3. Examples Following are examples of various queries and the corresponding - replies for the RPKI publication protocol + replies for the RPKI publication protocol. + + Note the authors have taken liberties with the Base64, hash, and URI + text in these examples in the interest of making the examples fit + nicely into RFC text format. 3.1. Query, No Existing Object - MIIE+jCCA+KgAwIBAgIBDTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQsFADAzMTEwLwYDVQQDEyhE - RjRBODAxN0U2NkE5RTkxNzJFNDYxMkQ4Q0Y0QzgzRjIzOERFMkEzMB4XDTA4 - MDUyMjE4MDUxMloXDTA4MDUyNDE3NTQ1M1owMzExMC8GA1UEAxMoOEZCODIx - OEYwNkU1MEFCNzAyQTdEOTZEQzhGMENEQ0Q4MjhGN0YxNzCCASIwDQYJKoZI - hvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMeziKp0k5nP7v6SZoNsXIMQYRgNtC6F - r/9Xm/1yQHomiPqHUk47rHhGojYiK5AhkrwoYhkH4UjJl2iwklDYczXuaBU3 - F5qrKlZ4aZnjIxdlP7+hktVpeApL6yuJTUAYeC3UIxnLDVdD6phydZ/FOQlu - ffiNDjzteCCvoyOUatqt8WB+oND6LToHp028g1YUYLHG6mur0dPdcHOVXLSm - UDuZ1HDz1nDuYvIVKjB/MpH9aW9XeaQ6ZFIlZVPwuuvI2brR+ThH7Gv27GL/ - o8qFdC300VQfoTZ+rKPGDE8K1cI906BL4kiwx9z0oiDcE96QCz+B0vsjc9mG - aA1jgAxlXWsCAwEAAaOCAhcwggITMB0GA1UdDgQWBBSPuCGPBuUKtwKn2W3I - 8M3Ngo9/FzAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBTfSoAX5mqekXLkYS2M9Mg/I43iozBVBgNV - HR8ETjBMMEqgSKBGhkRyc3luYzovL2xvY2FsaG9zdDo0NDAwL3Rlc3RiZWQv - UklSLzEvMzBxQUYtWnFucEZ5NUdFdGpQVElQeU9ONHFNLmNybDBFBggrBgEF - BQcBAQQ5MDcwNQYIKwYBBQUHMAKGKXJzeW5jOi8vbG9jYWxob3N0OjQ0MDAv - dGVzdGJlZC9XT01CQVQuY2VyMBgGA1UdIAEB/wQOMAwwCgYIKwYBBQUHDgIw - DwYDVR0TAQH/BAUwAwEB/zAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwgZsGCCsGAQUFBwEL - BIGOMIGLMDQGCCsGAQUFBzAFhihyc3luYzovL2xvY2FsaG9zdDo0NDAwL3Rl - c3RiZWQvUklSL1IwLzEvMFMGCCsGAQUFBzAKhkdyc3luYzovL2xvY2FsaG9z - dDo0NDAwL3Rlc3RiZWQvUklSL1IwLzEvajdnaGp3YmxDcmNDcDlsdHlQRE56 - WUtQZnhjLm1uZjAaBggrBgEFBQcBCAEB/wQLMAmgBzAFAgMA/BUwPgYIKwYB - BQUHAQcBAf8ELzAtMCsEAgABMCUDAwAKAzAOAwUAwAACAQMFAcAAAiAwDgMF - AsAAAiwDBQDAAAJkMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBCwUAA4IBAQCEhuH7jtI2PJY6+zwv - 306vmCuXhtu9Lr2mmRw2ZErB8EMcb5xypMrNqMoKeu14K2x4a4RPJkK4yATh - M81FPNRsU5mM0acIRnAPtxjHvPME7PHN2w2nGLASRsZmaa+b8A7SSOxVcFUR - azENztppsolHeTpm0cpLItK7mNpudUg1JGuFo94VLf1MnE2EqARG1vTsNhel - /SM/UvOArCCOBvf0Gz7kSuupDSZ7qx+LiDmtEsLdbGNQBiYPbLrDk41PHrxd - x28qIj7ejZkRzNFw/3pi8/XK281h8zeHoFVu6ghRPy5dbOA4akX/KG6b8XIx - 0iwPYdLiDbdWFbtTdPcXBauY + uri="rsync://wombat.example/Alice/60d730635fce156f.cer"> + WW91IGNhbiBoYWNrIGFueXRoaW5nIHlvdSB3YW50Li4u 3.2. Query, Overwriting Existing Object - MIIE+jCCA+KgAwIBAgIBDTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQsFADAzMTEwLwYDVQQDEyhE - RjRBODAxN0U2NkE5RTkxNzJFNDYxMkQ4Q0Y0QzgzRjIzOERFMkEzMB4XDTA4 - MDUyMjE4MDUxMloXDTA4MDUyNDE3NTQ1M1owMzExMC8GA1UEAxMoOEZCODIx - OEYwNkU1MEFCNzAyQTdEOTZEQzhGMENEQ0Q4MjhGN0YxNzCCASIwDQYJKoZI - hvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMeziKp0k5nP7v6SZoNsXIMQYRgNtC6F - r/9Xm/1yQHomiPqHUk47rHhGojYiK5AhkrwoYhkH4UjJl2iwklDYczXuaBU3 - F5qrKlZ4aZnjIxdlP7+hktVpeApL6yuJTUAYeC3UIxnLDVdD6phydZ/FOQlu - ffiNDjzteCCvoyOUatqt8WB+oND6LToHp028g1YUYLHG6mur0dPdcHOVXLSm - UDuZ1HDz1nDuYvIVKjB/MpH9aW9XeaQ6ZFIlZVPwuuvI2brR+ThH7Gv27GL/ - o8qFdC300VQfoTZ+rKPGDE8K1cI906BL4kiwx9z0oiDcE96QCz+B0vsjc9mG - aA1jgAxlXWsCAwEAAaOCAhcwggITMB0GA1UdDgQWBBSPuCGPBuUKtwKn2W3I - 8M3Ngo9/FzAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBTfSoAX5mqekXLkYS2M9Mg/I43iozBVBgNV - HR8ETjBMMEqgSKBGhkRyc3luYzovL2xvY2FsaG9zdDo0NDAwL3Rlc3RiZWQv - UklSLzEvMzBxQUYtWnFucEZ5NUdFdGpQVElQeU9ONHFNLmNybDBFBggrBgEF - BQcBAQQ5MDcwNQYIKwYBBQUHMAKGKXJzeW5jOi8vbG9jYWxob3N0OjQ0MDAv - dGVzdGJlZC9XT01CQVQuY2VyMBgGA1UdIAEB/wQOMAwwCgYIKwYBBQUHDgIw - DwYDVR0TAQH/BAUwAwEB/zAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwgZsGCCsGAQUFBwEL - BIGOMIGLMDQGCCsGAQUFBzAFhihyc3luYzovL2xvY2FsaG9zdDo0NDAwL3Rl - c3RiZWQvUklSL1IwLzEvMFMGCCsGAQUFBzAKhkdyc3luYzovL2xvY2FsaG9z - dDo0NDAwL3Rlc3RiZWQvUklSL1IwLzEvajdnaGp3YmxDcmNDcDlsdHlQRE56 - WUtQZnhjLm1uZjAaBggrBgEFBQcBCAEB/wQLMAmgBzAFAgMA/BUwPgYIKwYB - BQUHAQcBAf8ELzAtMCsEAgABMCUDAwAKAzAOAwUAwAACAQMFAcAAAiAwDgMF - AsAAAiwDBQDAAAJkMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBCwUAA4IBAQCEhuH7jtI2PJY6+zwv - 306vmCuXhtu9Lr2mmRw2ZErB8EMcb5xypMrNqMoKeu14K2x4a4RPJkK4yATh - M81FPNRsU5mM0acIRnAPtxjHvPME7PHN2w2nGLASRsZmaa+b8A7SSOxVcFUR - azENztppsolHeTpm0cpLItK7mNpudUg1JGuFo94VLf1MnE2EqARG1vTsNhel - /SM/UvOArCCOBvf0Gz7kSuupDSZ7qx+LiDmtEsLdbGNQBiYPbLrDk41PHrxd - x28qIj7ejZkRzNFw/3pi8/XK281h8zeHoFVu6ghRPy5dbOA4akX/KG6b8XIx - 0iwPYdLiDbdWFbtTdPcXBauY + hash="60d730635fce156f" + uri="rsync://wombat.example/Alice/60d730635fce156f.cer"> + WW91IGNhbiBoYWNrIGFueXRoaW5nIHlvdSB3YW50Li4u 3.3. Reply + + uri="rsync://wombat.example/Alice/60d730635fce156f.cer"/> 3.4. Query + hash="60d730635fce156f" + uri="rsync://wombat.example/Alice/60d730635fce156f.cer"/> 3.5. Reply + uri="rsync://wombat.example/Alice/60d730635fce156f.cer"/> -3.6. With Text +3.6. With Optional Elements - Shampooing with sterno again, are we? + error_code="no_object_matching_hash"> + + Can't delete an object I don't have + + + + WW91IGNhbiBoYWNrIGFueXRoaW5nIHlvdSB3YW50Li4u + + -3.7. Without Text +3.7. Without Optional Elements + + error_code="object_already_present"/> + + +3.8. Error Handling With Multi-Element Queries + +3.8.1. Multi-Element Query + + + QWxpY2U= + + + + Q2Fyb2w= + + + + + RXZl + + + +3.8.2. Successful Multi-Element Response + + + + + + + + + + + + +3.8.3. Failure Multi-Element Response + + + + + + + + + + + + + 4. Operational Considerations There are two basic options open to the repository operator as to how the publication tree is laid out. The first option is simple: each publication client is given its own directory one level below the top of the rsync module, and there is no overlap between the publication spaces used by different clients. For example: @@ -587,25 +735,23 @@ fips-180-4.pdf>. 7.2. Informative References [RFC6480] Lepinski, M. and S. Kent, "An Infrastructure to Support Secure Internet Routing", RFC 6480, February 2012. Authors' Addresses Samuel Weiler - SPARTA, Inc. - 7110 Samuel Morse Drive - Columbia, Maryland 21046 - US + Parsons Email: weiler@tislabs.com + Anuja Sonalker Battelle Memorial Institute Email: sonalkera@battelle.org Rob Austein Dragon Research Labs Email: sra@hactrn.net