Category: Informational. F. Baboescu Broadcom Corporation B. Weis. Cisco. September 2015

Similar documents
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) February Local Mobility Anchor (LMA) Discovery for Proxy Mobile IPv6

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Cisco C. Perkins Futurewei Inc. October Separation of Control and User Plane for Proxy Mobile IPv6

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7791 Category: Standards Track. March 2016

Request for Comments: 6909 Category: Standards Track. J. Korhonen Renesas Mobile G. Feige R. Koodli. Cisco. April 2013

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. Cisco Systems J. Korhonen Broadcom Limited June 2016

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6379 Obsoletes: 4869 Category: Informational October 2011 ISSN:

Network Working Group. Intended status: Informational. H. Deng. China Mobile. July 4, 2014

Quality-of-Service Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8278 Category: Standards Track. S. Gundavelli Cisco January 2018

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) ISSN: H. Yokota KDDI Lab X. Cui Huawei Technologies February 2012

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6279 Category: Informational ISSN: Q. Wu Huawei June 2011

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Informational. May IEEE Information Element for the IETF

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. C. Williams Consultant S. Gundavelli Cisco CJ. Bernardos UC3M March 2014

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6572 Category: Standards Track

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8191 Category: Standards Track. X. Lee CNNIC. August 2017

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6612 Category: Informational May 2012 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8465 September 2018 Category: Informational ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. May Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) Bootstrapping for the Integrated Scenario

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Cisco Z. Cao H. Deng Z. Du Huawei April 2018

Network Working Group. Siemens Networks GmbH & Co KG February Online Certificate Status Protocol (OCSP) Extensions to IKEv2

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Informational March 2016 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6867 Category: Experimental ISSN: January 2013

Request for Comments: E. Demaria Telecom Italia J. Bournelle Orange Labs R. Lopez University of Murcia September 2009

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: Google K. Patel Cisco Systems August 2015

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7255 Category: Informational May 2014 ISSN:

Clarifications for When to Use the name-addr Production in SIP Messages

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: Category: Standards Track ISSN: September 2015

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. S. Gundavelli Cisco R. Wakikawa Toyota ITC May 2012

Intended status: Informational. Intel Corporation P. Seite. France Telecom - Orange. February 14, 2013

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8055 Category: Standards Track. January 2017

Request for Comments: 8112 Category: Informational. I. Kouvelas Arista D. Lewis Cisco Systems May 2017

Network Security: IPsec. Tuomas Aura

Request for Comments: 7314 Category: Experimental July 2014 ISSN: Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS) EXPIRE Option.

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8035 Updates: 5761 November 2016 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. February 2012

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: Independent September An Extension for EAP-Only Authentication in IKEv2

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: October 2011

Protocol Support for High Availability of IKEv2/IPsec

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Updates: 5451 March 2012 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: Category: Standards Track. Juniper July 2017

Intended Status: Proposed Standard. Proxy Mobile IPv6 Management Information Base <draft-ietf-netlmm-pmipv6-mib-03.txt>

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Updates: 2474 August 2018 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Request for Comments: Category: Best Current Practice June 2008

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8186 Category: Standards Track. June 2017

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: Category: Standards Track. Cisco May 2012

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6440 Category: Standards Track. Huawei December 2011

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: P. Yegani Juniper June 2015

Proxy Mobile IPv6 draft-ietf-netlmm-proxymip6-01.txt

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: Category: Standards Track ISSN: February 2016

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7973 Category: Informational ISSN: November 2016

3GPP TS V9.4.0 ( )

DHCPv6 Option for IPv4-Embedded Multicast and Unicast IPv6 Prefixes

Internet Engineering Task Force. Intended status: Informational. April 19, 2017

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8437 Updates: 3501 August 2018 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. S. Krishnan Ericsson October 2015

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track December 2012 ISSN:

Network Security: IPsec. Tuomas Aura T Network security Aalto University, Nov-Dec 2014

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. J. Halpern Ericsson E. Levy-Abegnoli, Ed. Cisco February 2017

Request for Comments: Wichorus G. Tsirtsis Qualcomm T. Ernst INRIA K. Nagami INTEC NetCore October 2009

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8184 Category: Informational

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: March 2016

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7725 Category: Standards Track February 2016 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 5725 Category: Standards Track ISSN: February 2010

Category: Experimental March 2010 ISSN: Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) Transactions

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: Category: Standards Track May 2011 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7660 Category: Standards Track. October 2015

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track December 2011 ISSN:

Request for Comments: 8367 Category: Informational ISSN: April Wrongful Termination of Internet Protocol (IP) Packets

GTP-based S2b Interface Support on the P-GW and SAEGW

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8069 Category: Informational February 2017 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: March 2017

Network Working Group. Azaire Networks H. Deng China Mobile J. Kempf DoCoMo USA Labs January 2008

Some optimizations can be done because of this selection of supported features. Those optimizations are specifically pointed out below.

RFC 6027 IPsec Cluster Problem Statement October Copyright Notice

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: Category: Best Current Practice ISSN: March 2017

Distributed Mobility Management: Current Practices and Gap Analysis

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. Enterprise Architects February 2012

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: August 2010

Updates: 6126 May 2015 Category: Experimental ISSN: Extension Mechanism for the Babel Routing Protocol

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7504 June 2015 Updates: 1846, 5321 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

ETSI TS V ( )

Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) Category: Informational May 2011 ISSN:

Category: Informational January 2010 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: April 2011

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Standards Track. Cisco Systems, Inc. J. Scudder Juniper Networks September 2016

Quality of Service Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6 draft-ietf-netext-pmip6-qos-03.txt

Request for Comments: 7717 Updates: 4656, 5357 Category: Standards Track. December 2015

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: November 2015

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7018 Category: Informational. September 2013

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7809 Updates: 4791 March 2016 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Network Working Group. Intended status: Informational Expires: October 24, 2013 April 22, 2013

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 7881 Category: Standards Track. Big Switch Networks July 2016

ETSI TS V8.0.0 ( ) Technical Specification

Request for Comments: 5402 Category: Informational February 2010 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 8142 Category: Standards Track April 2017 ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: J. Haas Juniper Networks March 2019

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Updates: 4326 June 2014 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: ISSN: July 2014

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Cisco Systems, Inc. April 2015

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Updates: 6376 January 2018 Category: Standards Track ISSN:

Transcription:

Independent Submission Request for Comments: 7651 Category: Informational ISSN: 2070-1721 A. Dodd-Noble S. Gundavelli Cisco J. Korhonen F. Baboescu Broadcom Corporation B. Weis Cisco September 2015 Abstract 3GPP IP Multimedia Subsystems (IMS) Option for the Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2) This document defines two new configuration attributes for the Internet Key Exchange Protocol version 2 (IKEv2). These attributes can be used for carrying the IPv4 address and IPv6 address of the Proxy-Call Session Control Function (P-CSCF). When an IPsec gateway delivers these attributes to an IPsec client, the IPsec client can obtain the IPv4 and/or IPv6 address of the P-CSCF server located in the 3GPP network. Status of This Memo This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes. This is a contribution to the RFC Series, independently of any other RFC stream. The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at its discretion and makes no statement about its value for implementation or deployment. Documents approved for publication by the RFC Editor are not a candidate for any level of Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741. Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7651. Dodd-Noble, et al. Informational [Page 1]

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 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Table of Contents 1. Introduction........................ 2 2. Conventions and Terminology................. 4 2.1. Conventions....................... 4 2.2. Terminology....................... 4 3. P_CSCF_IP4_ADDRESS Configuration Attribute......... 4 4. P_CSCF_IP6_ADDRESS Configuration Attribute......... 5 5. Example Scenario...................... 7 6. IANA Considerations..................... 7 7. Security Considerations................... 8 8. References......................... 8 8.1. Normative References.................. 8 8.2. Informative References................. 8 Acknowledgements........................ 9 Authors Addresses....................... 10 1. Introduction The Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) S2b reference point [TS23402], specified by the 3GPP system architecture, defines a mechanism for allowing a mobile node (MN) attached in an untrusted, non-3gpp IP access network to securely connect to a 3GPP network and access IP services. In this scenario, the mobile node establishes an IPsec Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) tunnel [RFC4303] to the security gateway called the Evolved Packet Data Gateway (epdg) that in turn establishes a Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) [RFC5213] or GPRS Tunneling Protocol (GTP) [TS23402] tunnel to the Packet Data Network Gateway (PGW) [TS23402] where the mobile node s session is anchored. The below figure shows the interworking option for non-3gpp access over an untrusted access network. The Mobile Access Gateway (MAG) and the Local Mobility Anchor (LMA) functions are defined in [RFC5213]. The epdg and PGW functions are defined in [TS23402]. The IPsec ESP tunnel is used between the MN and the epdg; either a PMIP or GTP tunnel is used between the epdg and PGW. Dodd-Noble, et al. Informational [Page 2]

+------------+ epdg +--------+ +------+ _----_ IPsec _----_ +-----+ MN _( )_ Module _( )_ LMA <====( Internet )===== +--------+ ===( Operator )=== (PGW) +------+ ( ) : (_Network_) +-----+ ---- +--------+ ---- IPsec Tunnel PMIPv6 PMIPv6/GTP Tunnel MAG +--------+ +------------+ <------------ IKEv2/IPsec ------> <------ PMIPv6/GTP -----> Figure 1: Exchange of IPv4 Traffic Offload Selectors A mobile node in this scenario may potentially need to access the IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) services in the 3GPP network. The 3GPP IMS architecture is described in [TS23228] and [TS24229]. Currently, there are no attributes in IKEv2 [RFC7296] that can be used for carrying these information elements. In the absence of these attributes, the mobile node needs to be statically configured with this information and this is proving to be an operational challenge. Any other approaches for discovering these functions (such as using DNS or DHCP) would result in obtaining configuration from the access network and not from the home network. Given that the above referenced 3GPP interface is primarily for allowing the mobile node to connect to the 3GPP network through an untrusted access network, the access network may not have any relation with the home network provider and may be unable to deliver the mobile node s home network configuration. This specification therefore defines two new IKEv2 attributes [RFC7296] that allow an IPsec gateway to provide the IPv4 and/or IPv6 address of the P-CSCF server. These attributes can be exchanged by IKEv2 peers as part of the configuration payload exchange. The attributes follow the configuration attribute format defined in Section 3.15.1 of [RFC7296]. Furthermore, providing the P-CSCF server address(es) in IKEv2 as a standard attribute(s) enables clients to directly access IMS services behind a VPN gateway without going through the 3GPP-specific interfaces. Dodd-Noble, et al. Informational [Page 3]

2. Conventions and Terminology 2.1. Conventions The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 2.2. Terminology All the IKEv2-related terms used in this document are to be interpreted as defined in [RFC7296] and [RFC5739]. All the mobilityrelated terms are to be interpreted as defined in [RFC5213] and [RFC5844]. Additionally, this document uses the following terms: Proxy-Call Session Control Function (P-CSCF) The P-CSCF is the entry point to the 3GPP IMS and serves as the SIP outbound proxy for the mobile node. The mobile node performs SIP registration to 3GPP IMS and initiates SIP sessions via a P-CSCF. Evolved Packet Data Gateway (epdg) This is a security gateway defined by the 3GPP system architecture. The protocol interfaces it supports include IKEv2 [RFC7296]. 3. P_CSCF_IP4_ADDRESS Configuration Attribute The P_CSCF_IP4_ADDRESS configuration attribute is formatted as follows: 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 R Attribute Type Length IPv4 Address Figure 2: IPv4 Address of P-CSCF Reserved (1 bit) Refer to the IKEv2 specification [RFC7296] Dodd-Noble, et al. Informational [Page 4]

Attribute Type (15 bits) 20 Length (2 octets) Length of the IPv4 address field that follows. Possible values are (0) and (4). A value of (4) indicates the size of the 4-octet IPv4 address that follows. A value of (0) indicates that it s an empty attribute with a zero-length IPv4 address field primarily used as a request indicator. IPv4 Address (4 octets) An IPv4 address of the P-CSCF server. The P_CSCF_IP4_ADDRESS configuration attribute provides an IPv4 address of a P-CSCF server within the network. If an instance of an empty P_CSCF_IP4_ADDRESS attribute with a zero-length IPv4 Address field is included by the mobile node, the responder MAY respond with zero, one, or more P_CSCF_IP4_ADDRESS attributes. If several P_CSCF_IP4_ADDRESS attributes are provided in one IKEv2 message, there is no implied order among the P_CSCF_IP4_ADDRESS attributes. However, a system architecture using this specification may be able to enforce some order at both the peers. 4. P_CSCF_IP6_ADDRESS Configuration Attribute The P_CSCF_IP6_ADDRESS configuration attribute is formatted as follows: 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 R Attribute Type Length IPv6 Address Figure 3: IPv6 Address of P-CSCF Reserved (1 bit) Refer to the IKEv2 specification [RFC7296] Attribute Type (15 bits) 21 Dodd-Noble, et al. Informational [Page 5]

Length (2 octets) Length of the IPv6 address field that follows. Possible values are (0) and (16). A value of (16) indicates the size of the 16-octet IPv6 address that follows. A value of (0) indicates that it s an empty attribute with a zero-length IPv6 address field primarily used as a request indicator. IPv6 Address (16 octets) An IPv6 address of the P-CSCF server. The P_CSCF_IP6_ADDRESS configuration attribute provides an IPv6 address of a P-CSCF server within the network. If an instance of an empty P_CSCF_IP6_ADDRESS attribute with a zero-length IPv6 Address field is included by the mobile node, the responder MAY respond with zero, one, or more P_CSCF_IP6_ADDRESS attributes. If several P_CSCF_IP6_ADDRESS attributes are provided in one IKEv2 message, there is no implied order among the P_CSCF_IP6_ADDRESS attributes. However, a system architecture using this specification may be able to enforce some order at both the peers. Dodd-Noble, et al. Informational [Page 6]

5. Example Scenario The mobile node MAY request the IP address of an P-CSCF server as shown below. Client Gateway -------- --------- HDR(IKE_SA_INIT), SAi1, KEi, Ni --> <-- HDR(IKE_SA_INIT), SAr1, KEr, Nr, [CERTREQ] HDR(IKE_AUTH), SK { IDi, CERT, [CERTREQ], AUTH, [IDr], CP(CFG_REQUEST) = { INTERNAL_IP4_ADDRESS(), INTERNAL_IP4_DNS(), P_CSCF_IP4_ADDRESS() }, SAi2, TSi = (0, 0-65535, 0.0.0.0-255.255.255.255), TSr = (0, 0-65535, 0.0.0.0-255.255.255.255) } --> <-- HDR(IKE_AUTH), SK { IDr, CERT, AUTH, CP(CFG_REPLY) = { INTERNAL_IP4_ADDRESS(192.0.2.234), P_CSCF_IP4_ADDRESS(192.0.2.1), P_CSCF_IP4_ADDRESS(192.0.2.4), INTERNAL_IP4_DNS(198.51.100.33) }, SAr2, TSi = (0, 0-65535, 192.0.2.234-192.0.2.234), TSr = (0, 0-65535, 0.0.0.0-255.255.255.255) } 6. IANA Considerations Figure 4: P-CSCF Attribute Exchange Per this document, the following IANA actions have been completed. o Action 1: This specification defines a new IKEv2 attribute for carrying the IPv4 address of the P-CSCF server. This attribute is defined in Section 3. It has been assigned value 20 from the "IKEv2 Configuration Payload Attribute Types" namespace defined in [RFC7296]. Dodd-Noble, et al. Informational [Page 7]

o Action 2: This specification defines a new IKEv2 attribute for carrying the IPv6 address of the P-CSCF server. This attribute is defined in Section 4. It has been assigned value 21 from the "IKEv2 Configuration Payload Attribute Types" namespace defined in [RFC7296]. 7. Security Considerations This document is an extension to IKEv2 [RFC7296] and therefore it inherits all the security properties of IKEv2. The two new IKEv2 attributes defined in this specification are for carrying the IPv4 and IPv6 address of the P-CSCF server. These attributes can be exchanged by IKE peers as part of the configuration payload, and the currently defined IKEv2 security framework provides the needed integrity and privacy protection for these attributes. Therefore, this specification does not introduce any new security vulnerabilities. 8. References 8.1. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. [RFC4303] Kent, S., "IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)", RFC 4303, DOI 10.17487/RFC4303, December 2005, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4303>. [RFC7296] Kaufman, C., Hoffman, P., Nir, Y., Eronen, P., and T. Kivinen, "Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)", STD 79, RFC 7296, DOI 10.17487/RFC7296, October 2014, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7296>. 8.2. Informative References [RFC5213] Gundavelli, S., Ed., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., Chowdhury, K., and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", RFC 5213, DOI 10.17487/RFC5213, August 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5213>. [RFC5739] Eronen, P., Laganier, J., and C. Madson, "IPv6 Configuration in Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)", RFC 5739, DOI 10.17487/RFC5739, February 2010, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5739>. Dodd-Noble, et al. Informational [Page 8]

[RFC5844] Wakikawa, R. and S. Gundavelli, "IPv4 Support for Proxy Mobile IPv6", RFC 5844, DOI 10.17487/RFC5844, May 2010, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5844>. [TS23228] 3GPP, "IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS); Stage 2", 3GPP TS 23.228, Version 13.3.0, June 2015. [TS23402] 3GPP, "Architecture enhancements for non-3gpp accesses", 3GPP TS 23.402, Version 13.2.0, June 2015. [TS24229] 3GPP, "IP multimedia call control protocol based on Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and Session Description Protocol (SDP); Stage 3", 3GPP TS 24.229, Version 13.2.1, June 2015. Acknowledgements The authors would like to specially thank Tero Kivinen for the detailed reviews. The authors would also like to thank Vojislav Vucetic, Heather Sze, Sebastian Speicher, Maulik Vaidya, Ivo Sedlacek, Pierrick Siete, and Hui Deng for all the discussions related to this topic. Dodd-Noble, et al. Informational [Page 9]

Authors Addresses Aeneas Noble Cisco 30 International Pl Tewksbury, MA 95134 United States Email: noblea@cisco.com Sri Gundavelli Cisco 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134 United States Email: sgundave@cisco.com Jouni Korhonen Broadcom Corporation 3151 Zanker Road San Jose, CA 95134 United States Email: jouni.nospam@gmail.com Florin Baboescu Broadcom Corporation 100 Mathilda Place Sunnyvale, CA 94086 United States Email: baboescu@broadcom.com Brian Weis Cisco 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134 United States Email: bew@cisco.com Dodd-Noble, et al. Informational [Page 10]