This repository was archived by the owner on Jan 14, 2021. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
Copy pathconstrained-anima-dtls-join-proxy-03.txt
1008 lines (681 loc) · 39 KB
/
constrained-anima-dtls-join-proxy-03.txt
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
anima Working Group M. Richardson
Internet-Draft Sandelman Software Works
Intended status: Standards Track P. van der Stok
Expires: September 15, 2020 vanderstok consultancy
P. Kampanakis
Cisco Systems
March 14, 2020
Constrained Join Proxy for Bootstrapping Protocols
draft-vanderstok-anima-constrained-join-proxy-03
Abstract
This document defines a protocol to securely assign a pledge to an
owner, using an intermediary node between pledge and owner. This
intermediary node is known as a "constrained Join Proxy".
This document extends the work of [ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra]
by replacing the Circuit-proxy by a stateless constrained Join Proxy,
that transports routing information.
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). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://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 September 15, 2020.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 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
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
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 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
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Join Proxy functionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Join Proxy specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5.1. Statefull Join Proxy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.2. Stateless Join Proxy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.3. Stateless Message structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Comparison of stateless and statefull modes . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.1. Join Proxy discovers EST server . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.1.1. Coap discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.1.2. Autonomous Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.1.3. 6tisch discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.2. Pledge discovers Join Proxy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.2.1. Autonomous Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.2.2. Coap discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9.1. Resource Type registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
12. Changelog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
12.1. 01 to 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
12.2. 00 to 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
12.3. 00 to 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Appendix A. Stateless Proxy payload examples . . . . . . . . . . 14
A.1. cacerts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
A.2. serverkeygen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1. Introduction
Enrolment of new nodes into constrained networks with constrained
nodes present is described in [I-D.ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra]
and makes use of Enrolment over Secure Transport (EST) [RFC7030].
The specified solutions use https and may be too large in terms of
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
code space or bandwidth required. Constrained devices in constrained
networks [RFC7228] typically implement the IPv6 over Low-Power
Wireless personal Area Networks (6LoWPAN) [RFC4944] and Constrained
Application Protocol (CoAP) [RFC7252].
CoAP has chosen Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) [RFC6347] as
the preferred security protocol for authenticity and confidentiality
of the messages. A constrained version of EST, using Coap and DTLS,
is described in [I-D.ietf-ace-coap-est].
DTLS is a client-server protocol relying on the underlying IP layer
to perform the routing between the DTLS Client and the DTLS Server.
However, the new "joining" device will not be IP routable until it is
authenticated to the network. A new "joining" device can only
initially use a link-local IPv6 address to communicate with a
neighbour node using neighbour discovery [RFC6775] until it receives
the necessary network configuration parameters. However, before the
device can receive these configuration parameters, it needs to
authenticate itself to the network to which it connects. In
[I-D.ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra] Enrolment over Secure
Transport (EST) [RFC7030] is used to authenticate the joining device.
However, IPv6 routing is necessary to establish a connection between
joining device and the EST server.
This document specifies a Join Proxy and protocol to act as
intermediary between joining device and EST server to establish a
connection between joining device and EST server.
This document is very much inspired by text published earlier in
[I-D.kumar-dice-dtls-relay].
2. Terminology
The following terms are defined in [RFC8366], and are used
identically as in that document: artifact, imprint, domain, Join
Registrar/Coordinator (JRC), Manufacturer Authorized Signing
Authority (MASA), pledge, Trust of First Use (TOFU), and Voucher.
3. Requirements Language
In this document, the key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED",
"SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY",
and "OPTIONAL" are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, RFC 2119
[RFC2119] and indicate requirement levels for compliant STuPiD
implementations.
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
4. Join Proxy functionality
As depicted in the Figure 1, the joining Device, or pledge (P), is
more than one hop away from the EST server (E) and not yet
authenticated into the network. At this stage, it can only
communicate one-hop to its nearest neighbour, the Join Proxy (J)
using their link-local IPv6 addresses. However, the Pledge (P) needs
to communicate with end-to-end security with a Registrar hosting the
EST server (E) to authenticate and get the relevant system/network
parameters. If the Pledge (P) initiates a DTLS connection to the EST
server whose IP address has been pre-configured, then the packets are
dropped at the Join Proxy (J) since the Pledge (P) is not yet
admitted to the network or there is no IP routability to Pledge (P)
for any returned messages.
++++
|E |---- +--+ +--+
| | \ |J |........|P |
++++ \-----| | | |
EST server +--+ +--+
REgistrar Join Proxy Pledge
"Joining" Device
Figure 1: multi-hop enrolment.
Furthermore, the Pledge (P) may wish to establish a secure connection
to the EST server (E) in the network assuming appropriate credentials
are exchanged out-of-band, e.g. a hash of the Pledge (P)'s raw public
key could be provided to the EST server (E). However, the Pledge (P)
may be unaware of the IP address of the EST-server (E) to initiate a
DTLS connection and perform authentication with.
A DTLS connection is required between Pledge and EST server. To
overcome the problems with non-routability of DTLS packets and/ or
discovery of the destination address of the EST Server to contact,
the Join Proxy is introduced. This Join Proxy functionality is
configured into all authenticated devices in the network which may
act as the Join Proxy for newly joining nodes. The Join Proxy allows
for routing of the packets from the Pledge using IP routing to the
intended EST Server.
5. Join Proxy specification
The Join Proxy can operate in two modes:
o Statefull mode
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
o Stateless mode
5.1. Statefull Join Proxy
In stateful mode, the joining node forwards the DTLS messages to the
EST Server.
Assume that the Pledge does not know the IP address of the EST Server
it needs to contact. In that situation, the Join Proxy knows the
(cofigured or discovered) IP address of a EST Server that the Pledge
needs to contact. The Pledge initiates its request as if the Join
Proxy is the intended EST Server. The Join Proxy changes the IP
packet (without modifying the DTLS message) as in the previous case
by modifying both the source and destination addresses to forward the
message to the intended EST Server. The Join Proxy maintains a
4-tuple array to translate the DTLS messages received from the EST
Server and forward it to the EST Client. In Figure 2 the various
steps of the message flow are shown:
+------------+------------+-------------+--------------------------+
| EST Client | Join Proxy | EST Server | Message |
| (P) | (J) | (E) | Src_IP:port | Dst_IP:port|
+------------+------------+-------------+-------------+------------+
| --ClientHello--> | IP_P:p_P | IP_Ja:5684 |
| --ClientHello--> | IP_Jb:p_Jb| IP_E:5684 |
| | | |
| <--ServerHello-- | IP_E:5684 | IP_Jb:p_Jb |
| : | | |
| <--ServerHello-- : | IP_Ja:5684| IP_P:p_P |
| : : | | |
| : : | : | : |
| : : | : | : |
| --Finished--> : | IP_P:p_P | IP_Ja:5684 |
| --Finished--> | IP_Jb:p_Jb| IP_E:5684 |
| | | |
| <--Finished-- | IP_E:5684 | IP_Jb:p_Jb |
| <--Finished-- | IP_Ja:5684| IP_P:p_P |
| : : | : | : |
+---------------------------------------+-------------+------------+
IP_P:p_P = Link-local IP address and port of Pledge (DTLS Client)
IP_E:5684 = Global IP address and coaps port of EST Server
IP_Ja:5684 = Link-local IP address and coaps port of Join Proxy
IP_Jb:p_Rb = Global IP address and port of Join proxy
Figure 2: constrained statefull joining message flow with EST server
address known to Join Proxy.
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
5.2. Stateless Join Proxy
The Join Proxy is stateless to minimize the requirements on the
constrained Join Proxy device.
When a joining device as a client attempts a DTLS connection to the
EST server, it uses its link-local IP address as its IP source
address. This message is transmitted one-hop to a neighbour node.
Under normal circumstances, this message would be dropped at the
neighbour node since the joining device is not yet IP routable or it
is not yet authenticated to send messages through the network.
However, if the neighbour device has the Join Proxy functionality
enabled, it routes the DTLS message to a specific EST Server.
Additional security mechanisms need to exist to prevent this routing
functionality being used by rogue nodes to bypass any network
authentication procedures.
If an untrusted DTLS Client that can only use link-local addressing
wants to contact a trusted end-point EST Server, it sends the DTLS
message to the Join Proxy. The Join Proxy extends this message into
a new type of message called Join ProxY (JPY) message and sends it on
to the EST server. The JPY message payload consists of two parts:
o Header (H) field: consisting of the source link-local address and
port of the Pledge (P), and
o Contents (C) field: containing the original DTLS message.
On receiving the JPY message, the EST Server retrieves the two parts.
The EST Server transiently stores the Header field information. The
EST server uses the Contents field to execute the EST server
functionality. However, when the EST Server replies, it also extends
its DTLS message with the header field in a JPY message and sends it
back to the Join Proxy. The Header contains the original source
link-local address and port of the DTLS Client from the transient
state stored earlier (which can now be discarded) and the Contents
field contains the DTLS message.
On receiving the JPY message, the Join Proxy retrieves the two parts.
It uses the Header field to route the DTLS message retrieved from the
Contents field to the Pledge.
The Figure 3 depicts the message flow diagram:
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
+--------------+------------+---------------+-----------------------+
| EST Client | Join Proxy | EST server | Message |
| (P) | (J) | (E) |Src_IP:port|Dst_IP:port|
+--------------+------------+---------------+-----------+-----------+
| --ClientHello--> | IP_P:p_P |IP_Ja:5684 |
| --JPY[H(IP_P:p_P),--> | IP_Jb:p_Jb|IP_E:5684 |
| C(ClientHello)] | | |
| <--JPY[H(IP_P:p_P),-- | IP_E:5684 |IP_Jb:p_Jb |
| C(ServerHello)] | | |
| <--ServerHello-- | IP_Ja:5684|IP_P:p_P |
| : | | |
| : | : | : |
| | : | : |
| --Finished--> | IP_P:p_P |IP_Ja:5684 |
| --JPY[H(IP_P:p_P),--> | IP_Jb:p_Jb|IP_E:5684 |
| C(Finished)] | | |
| <--JPY[H(IP_P:p_P),-- | IP_E:5684 |IP_Jb:p_Jb |
| C(Finished)] | | |
| <--Finished-- | IP_Ja:5684|IP_P:p_P |
| : | : | : |
+-------------------------------------------+-----------+-----------+
IP_P:p_P = Link-local IP address and port of the Pledge
IP_E:5684 = Global IP address and coaps port of EST Server
IP_Ja:5684 = Link-local IP address and coaps port of Join Proxy
IP_Jb:p_Jb = Global IP address and port of Join Proxy
JPY[H(),C()] = Join Proxy message with header H and content C
Figure 3: constrained stateless joining message flow.
5.3. Stateless Message structure
The JPY message is constructed as a payload with media-type
application/multipart-core specified in [I-D.ietf-core-multipart-ct].
Header and Contents fields use different media formats:
1. header field: application/CBOR containing a CBOR array [RFC7049]
with the pledge IPv6 Link Local address as a 16-byte binary
value, the pledge's UDP port number, if different from 5684, as a
CBOR integer, and the proxy's ifindex or other identifier for the
physical port on which the pledge is connected. Header is not
DTLS encrypted.
2. Content field: Any of the media types specified in
[I-D.ietf-ace-coap-est] and [I-D.ietf-anima-constrained-voucher]
dependent on the function that is requested:
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
* application/pkcs7-mime; smime-type=server-generated-key
* application/pkcs7-mime; smime-type=certs-only
* application/voucher-cms+cbor
* application/voucher-cose+cbor
* application/pkcs8
* application/csrattrs
* application/pkcs10
* application/pkix-cert
The content fields are DTLS encrypted. In CBOR diagnostic notation
the payload JPY[H(IP_P:p_P), with cf is content-format of DTLS-
content, will look like:
[ 60: [IP_p, p_P, ident]
cf: h'DTLS-content']
Examples are shown in Appendix A.
6. Comparison of stateless and statefull modes
The stateful and stateless mode of operation for the Join Proxy have
their advantages and disadvantages. This section should enable to
make a choice between the two modes based on the available device
resources and network bandwidth.
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
+-------------+----------------------------+------------------------+
| Properties | Stateful mode | Stateless mode |
+-------------+----------------------------+------------------------+
| State |The Join Proxy needs | No information is |
| Information |additional storage to | maintained by the Join |
| |maintain mapping between | Proxy |
| |the address and port number | |
| |of the pledge and those | |
| |of the EST-server. | |
+-------------+----------------------------+------------------------+
|Packet size |The size of the forwarded |Size of the forwarded |
| |message is the same as the |message is bigger than |
| |original message. |the original,it includes|
| | |additional source and |
| | |destination addresses. |
+-------------+----------------------------+------------------------+
|Specification|The Join Proxy needs |New JPY message to |
|complexity |additional functionality |encapsulate DTLS message|
| |to maintain state |The EST server |
| |information, and modify |and the Join Proxy |
| |the source and destination |have to understand the |
| |addresses of the DTLS |JPY message in order |
| |handshake messages |to process it. |
+-------------+----------------------------+------------------------+
Figure 4: Comparison between stateful and stateless mode
7. Discovery
It is assumed that Join Proxy seamlessly provides a coaps connection
between Pledge and coaps EST-server. An additional Registrar is
needed to connect the Pledge to an http EST server, see section 8 of
[I-D.ietf-ace-coap-est]. In particular this section replaces section
4.2 of [I-D.ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra].
Three discovery cases are discussed: coap discovery, 6tisch discovery
and GRASP discovery.
7.1. Join Proxy discovers EST server
7.1.1. Coap discovery
The discovery of the coaps EST server, using coap discovery, by the
Join Proxy follows section 6 of [I-D.ietf-ace-coap-est].
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
7.1.2. Autonomous Network
In the context of autonomous networks, the Join Proxy uses the DULL
GRASP M_FLOOD mechanism to announce itself. Section 4.1.1 of
[I-D.ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra] discusses this in more
detail. The EST-server announces itself using ACP instance of GRASP
using M_FLOOD messages. Autonomous Network Join Proxies MUST support
GRASP discovery of EST-server as decribed in section 4.3 of
[I-D.ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra] .
7.1.3. 6tisch discovery
The discovery of EST server by the pledge uses the enhanced beacons
as discussed in [I-D.ietf-6tisch-enrollment-enhanced-beacon].
7.2. Pledge discovers Join Proxy
The pledge and Join Proxy are assumed to communicate via Link-Local
addresses.
7.2.1. Autonomous Network
The pledge MUST listen for GRASP M_FLOOD [I-D.ietf-anima-grasp]
announcements of the objective: "AN_Proxy". See section
Section 4.1.1 [I-D.ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra] for the details
of the objective.
7.2.2. Coap discovery
In the context of a coap network without Autonomous Network support,
discovery follows the standard coap policy. The Pledge can discover
a Join Proxy by sending a link-local multicast message to ALL CoAP
Nodes with address FF02::FD. Multiple or no nodes may respond. The
handling of multiple responses and the absence of responses follow
section 4 of [I-D.ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra].
The presence and location of (path to) the Join Proxy resource are
discovered by sending a GET request to "/.well-known/core" including
a resource type (rt) parameter with the value "brski-proxy"
[RFC6690]. Upon success, the return payload will contain the root
resource of the Join Proxy resources. It is up to the implementation
to choose its root resource; throughout this document the example
root resource /jp is used. The example below shows the discovery of
the presence and location of Join Proxy resources.
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
REQ: GET coap://[FF02::FD]/.well-known/core?rt=brski-proxy
RES: 2.05 Content
</jp>; rt="brski-proxy";ct=62
Port numbers, not returned in the example, are assumed to be the
default numbers 5683 and 5684 for coap and coaps respectively
(sections 12.6 and 12.7 of [RFC7252]. Discoverable port numbers MAY
be returned in the <href> of the payload (see section 5.1 of
[I-D.ietf-ace-coap-est]).
8. Security Considerations
It should be noted here that the contents of the CBOR map are not
protected, but that the communication is between the Proxy and a
known registrar (a connected UDP socket), and that messages from
other origins are ignored.
9. IANA Considerations
This document needs to create a registry for key indices in the CBOR
map. It should be given a name, and the amending formula should be
IETF Specification.
9.1. Resource Type registry
This specification registers a new Resource Type (rt=) Link Target
Attributes in the "Resource Type (rt=) Link Target Attribute Values"
subregistry under the "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE)
Parameters" registry.
rt="brski-proxy". This EST resource is used to query and return
the supported EST resource of a Join Proxy placed between Pledge
and EST server.
10. Acknowledgements
Many thanks for the comments by Brian Carpenter.
11. Contributors
Sandeep Kumar, Sye loong Keoh, and Oscar Garcia-Morchon are the co-
authors of the draft-kumar-dice-dtls-relay-02. Their draft has
served as a basis for this document. Much text from their draft is
copied over to this draft.
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
12. Changelog
12.1. 01 to 02
o extended the discovery section
o removed inconsistencies from the the flow diagrams
o Improved readability of the examples.
o stateful configurations reduced to one
12.2. 00 to 01
o Added Contributors section
o Adapted content-formats to est-coaps formats
o Aligned examples with est-coaps examples
o Added statefull Proxy to stateless proxy
12.3. 00 to 00
o added payload examples in appendix
o discovery for three cases: AN, 6tisch and coaps
13. References
13.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-6tisch-enrollment-enhanced-beacon]
Dujovne, D. and M. Richardson, "IEEE 802.15.4 Information
Element encapsulation of 6TiSCH Join and Enrollment
Information", draft-ietf-6tisch-enrollment-enhanced-
beacon-14 (work in progress), February 2020.
[I-D.ietf-ace-coap-est]
Stok, P., Kampanakis, P., Richardson, M., and S. Raza,
"EST over secure CoAP (EST-coaps)", draft-ietf-ace-coap-
est-18 (work in progress), January 2020.
[I-D.ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra]
Pritikin, M., Richardson, M., Eckert, T., Behringer, M.,
and K. Watsen, "Bootstrapping Remote Secure Key
Infrastructures (BRSKI)", draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-
keyinfra-38 (work in progress), March 2020.
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
[I-D.ietf-anima-constrained-voucher]
Richardson, M., Stok, P., and P. Kampanakis, "Constrained
Voucher Artifacts for Bootstrapping Protocols", draft-
ietf-anima-constrained-voucher-07 (work in progress),
January 2020.
[I-D.ietf-anima-grasp]
Bormann, C., Carpenter, B., and B. Liu, "A Generic
Autonomic Signaling Protocol (GRASP)", draft-ietf-anima-
grasp-15 (work in progress), July 2017.
[I-D.ietf-core-multipart-ct]
Fossati, T., Hartke, K., and C. Bormann, "Multipart
Content-Format for CoAP", draft-ietf-core-multipart-ct-04
(work in progress), August 2019.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC6347] Rescorla, E. and N. Modadugu, "Datagram Transport Layer
Security Version 1.2", RFC 6347, DOI 10.17487/RFC6347,
January 2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6347>.
[RFC7049] Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object
Representation (CBOR)", RFC 7049, DOI 10.17487/RFC7049,
October 2013, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7049>.
[RFC8366] Watsen, K., Richardson, M., Pritikin, M., and T. Eckert,
"A Voucher Artifact for Bootstrapping Protocols",
RFC 8366, DOI 10.17487/RFC8366, May 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8366>.
13.2. Informative References
[duckling]
Stajano, F. and R. Anderson, "The resurrecting duckling:
security issues for ad-hoc wireless networks", 1999,
<https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~fms27/
papers/1999-StajanoAnd-duckling.pdf>.
[I-D.kumar-dice-dtls-relay]
Kumar, S., Keoh, S., and O. Garcia-Morchon, "DTLS Relay
for Constrained Environments", draft-kumar-dice-dtls-
relay-02 (work in progress), October 2014.
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
[pledge] Dictionary.com, ., "Dictionary.com Unabridged", 2015,
<http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pledge>.
[RFC4944] Montenegro, G., Kushalnagar, N., Hui, J., and D. Culler,
"Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IEEE 802.15.4
Networks", RFC 4944, DOI 10.17487/RFC4944, September 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4944>.
[RFC6690] Shelby, Z., "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) Link
Format", RFC 6690, DOI 10.17487/RFC6690, August 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6690>.
[RFC6775] Shelby, Z., Ed., Chakrabarti, S., Nordmark, E., and C.
Bormann, "Neighbor Discovery Optimization for IPv6 over
Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs)",
RFC 6775, DOI 10.17487/RFC6775, November 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6775>.
[RFC7030] Pritikin, M., Ed., Yee, P., Ed., and D. Harkins, Ed.,
"Enrollment over Secure Transport", RFC 7030,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7030, October 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7030>.
[RFC7228] Bormann, C., Ersue, M., and A. Keranen, "Terminology for
Constrained-Node Networks", RFC 7228,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7228, May 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7228>.
[RFC7252] Shelby, Z., Hartke, K., and C. Bormann, "The Constrained
Application Protocol (CoAP)", RFC 7252,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7252, June 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7252>.
Appendix A. Stateless Proxy payload examples
Examples are extensions of two examples shown in
[I-D.ietf-ace-coap-est]. The following content formats are used:
o 60: application/cbor
o 62: application/multipart
o 281: application/pkcs7-mime; smime-type=certs-only
o 284: application/pkcs8
o 286: application/pkcs10
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
For presentation purposes the payloads are abbreviated as follows:
cacrts request payload:
<cacrts request payload> = <empty>
cacrts response payload:
<cacrts response payload> =
DTLS_encrypt(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)
serverkeygen request payload:
<serverkeygen request payload> =
DTLS_encrypt(
3081cf3078020100301631143012060355040a0c0b736b67206578616d70
6c653059301306072a8648ce3d020106082a8648ce3d030107034200041b
b8c1117896f98e4506c03d70efbe820d8e38ea97e9d65d52c8460c5852c5
1dd89a61370a2843760fc859799d78cd33f3c1846e304f1717f8123f1a28
4cc99fa000300a06082a8648ce3d04030203470030440220387cd4e9cf62
8d4af77f92ebed4890d9d141dca86cd2757dd14cbd59cdf6961802202f24
5e828c77754378b66660a4977f113cacdaa0cc7bad7d1474a7fd155d090d
)
serverkeygen response payload:
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
<serverkeygen response payload> =
DTLS_encrypt(
84 # array(4)
19 011C # unsigned(284)
58 8A # bytes(138)
308187020100301306072a8648ce3d020106082a8648ce3d030107046d30
6b02010104200b9a67785b65e07360b6d28cfc1d3f3925c0755799deeca7
45372b01697bd8a6a144034200041bb8c1117896f98e4506c03d70efbe82
0d8e38ea97e9d65d52c8460c5852c51dd89a61370a2843760fc859799d78
cd33f3c1846e304f1717f8123f1a284cc99f
19 0119 # unsigned(281)
59 01D3 # bytes(467)
308201cf06092a864886f70d010702a08201c0308201bc0201013100300b
06092a864886f70d010701a08201a23082019e30820143a0030201020208
126de8571518524b300a06082a8648ce3d04030230163114301206035504
0a0c0b736b67206578616d706c65301e170d313930313039303835373038
5a170d3339303130343038353730385a301631143012060355040a0c0b73
6b67206578616d706c653059301306072a8648ce3d020106082a8648ce3d
030107034200041bb8c1117896f98e4506c03d70efbe820d8e38ea97e9d6
5d52c8460c5852c51dd89a61370a2843760fc859799d78cd33f3c1846e30
4f1717f8123f1a284cc99fa37b307930090603551d1304023000302c0609
6086480186f842010d041f161d4f70656e53534c2047656e657261746564
204365727469666963617465301d0603551d0e04160414494be598dc8dbc
0dbc071c486b777460e5cce621301f0603551d23041830168014494be598
dc8dbc0dbc071c486b777460e5cce621300a06082a8648ce3d0403020349
003046022100a4b167d0f9add9202810e6bf6a290b8cfdfc9b9c9fea2cc1
c8fc3a464f79f2c202210081d31ba142751a7b4a34fd1a01fcfb08716b9e
b53bdaadc9ae60b08f52429c0fa1003100
)
A.1. cacerts
The request from Join Proxy to EST-server looks like:
Get coaps://192.0.2.1/est/crts
(Accept: 62)
(Content-format: 62)
payload =
82 # array(2)
18 3C # unsigned(60)
83 # array(3)
69 # text(9)
464538303A3A414238 # "FE80::AB8"
19 237D # unsigned(9085)
65 # text(5)
6964656E74 # "ident"
In CBOR Diagnostic:
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
payload = [60, ["FE80::AB8", 9085, "ident"]]
The response will then be:
2.05 Content
(Content-format: 62)
Payload =
84 # array(4)
18 3C # unsigned(60)
83 # array(3)
69 # text(9)
464538303A3A414238 # "FE80::AB8"
19 237D # unsigned(9085)
65 # text(5)
6964656E74 # "ident"
19 0119 # unsigned(281)
59 027F # bytes(639)
<cacrts response payload>
]
In CBOR diagnostic:
payload = [60, ["FE80::AB8", 9085, "ident"],
62, h'<cacrts response payload>']
A.2. serverkeygen
The request from Join Proxy to EST-server looks like:
Get coaps://192.0.2.1/est/skg
(Accept: 62)
(Content-Format: 62)
Payload =
83 # array(4)
18 3C # unsigned(60)
83 # array(3)
69 # text(9)
464538303A3A414238 # "FE80::AB8"
19 237D # unsigned(9085)
65 # text(5)
6964656E74 # "ident"
19 011E # unsigned(286)
58 D2 # bytes(210)
<serverkeygen request payload>
In CBOR diagnostic:
Richardson, et al. Expires September 15, 2020 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Join-Proxy March 2020
payload = [60, ["FE80::AB8", 9085, "ident"],
286, h'<serverkeygen request payload>']
The response will then be:
2.05 Content
(Content-format: 62)
Payload =
83 # array(4)
18 3C # unsigned(60)
83 # array(3)
69 # text(9)
464538303A3A414238 # "FE80::AB8"
19 237D # unsigned(9085)
65 # text(5)
6964656E74 # "ident"
19 011E # unsigned(286)
59 0269 # bytes(617)
<serverkeygen response payload>
In CBOR diagnostic:
payload = [60, ["FE80::AB8", 9085, "ident"],
286, h'<serverkeygen response payload>']
Authors' Addresses
Michael Richardson
Sandelman Software Works
Email: mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca
Peter van der Stok
vanderstok consultancy
Email: consultancy@vanderstok.org
Panos Kampanakis
Cisco Systems
Email: pkampana@cisco.com