Outline for Requirements for an EAP Tunnel Based Method
draft-salowey-emu-eaptunnel-req-00.txt

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 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 August 21, 2008.

Abstract

This memo provides an outline for the requirements for a Tunnel Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) Method. This method will use Transport Layer Security (TLS) to establish a tunnel. The tunnel will support password authentication, EAP authentication and the transport of additional data for other purposes.

Table of Contents

1.  Introduction

2.  Conventions Used In This Document

3.  Requirements
    3.1.  General Requirements
        3.1.1.  RFC Compliance
        3.1.2.  Draw from existing work
        3.1.3.  Use cases
            3.1.3.1.  Password authentication
            3.1.3.2.  Chained EAP Methods
            3.1.3.3.  Identity Protection
            3.1.3.4.  Emergency Services Authentication
            3.1.3.5.  Network Endpoint Assessment
            3.1.3.6.  Credential Provisioning/Enrollment
            3.1.3.7.  Resource Constrained Environments
    3.2.  Tunnel Establishment Requirements
        3.2.1.  TLS Requirements
            3.2.1.1.  Ciphersuites
            3.2.1.2.  TLS Extensions (OCSP, server name?, channel binding?)
            3.2.1.3.  Client Authentication and Identity Privacy
            3.2.1.4.  Session Resumption
        3.2.2.  Fragmentation
        3.2.3.  EAP Header Protection
        3.2.4.  Privacy and EAP Identity
        3.2.5.  Additional Signaling
    3.3.  Tunnel Payload Requirements
        3.3.1.  Extensible Data Types
        3.3.2.  Request/Challenge Response Operation
        3.3.3.  Mandatory and Optional Attributes
        3.3.4.  Vendor Specific Support
        3.3.5.  Result Indication
    3.4.  Channel Binding Requirements
        3.4.1.  Definition
        3.4.2.  Directionality
        3.4.3.  Data Types
    3.5.  Requirements Associated with Carrying Username and Passwords
        3.5.1.  security
            3.5.1.1.  Confidentiality and Integrity
            3.5.1.2.  Authentication of Server
            3.5.1.3.  Credential Validation (revocation validation)
        3.5.2.  Internationalization
            3.5.2.1.  Username
            3.5.2.2.  Passwords
        3.5.3.  Meta-data
        3.5.4.  Password Change
    3.6.  Requirements Associated with Carrying EAP Methods
        3.6.1.  Method Negotiation
        3.6.2.  Method Chaining
        3.6.3.  Cryptographic Binding with TLS Channel
        3.6.4.  Compound Keys
        3.6.5.  Intermediate Results
        3.6.6.  Client Initiated
        3.6.7.  Method meta-data

4.  IANA Considerations

5.  Security Considerations

6.  References
    6.1.  Normative References
    6.2.  Informative References

§  Author's Address
§  Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements

1.  Introduction

2.  Conventions Used In This Document

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 [RFC2119] (Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” March 1997.)

3.  Requirements

3.1.  General Requirements

3.1.1.  RFC Compliance

- 3784 (incl. security properties), 4017, EAP Keying, crypto agility

3.1.2.  Draw from existing work

EAP-TLS, EAP-TTLS, EAP-FAST, PEAP

3.1.3.  Use cases

3.1.3.1.  Password authentication

3.1.3.2.  Chained EAP Methods

3.1.3.3.  Identity Protection

3.1.3.4.  Emergency Services Authentication

3.1.3.5.  Network Endpoint Assessment

3.1.3.6.  Credential Provisioning/Enrollment

3.1.3.7.  Resource Constrained Environments

Define Resource Constrained

3.2.  Tunnel Establishment Requirements

3.2.1.  TLS Requirements

3.2.1.1.  Ciphersuites

3.2.1.2.  TLS Extensions (OCSP, server name?, channel binding?)

3.2.1.3.  Client Authentication and Identity Privacy

3.2.1.4.  Session Resumption

3.2.2.  Fragmentation

3.2.3.  EAP Header Protection

3.2.4.  Privacy and EAP Identity

3.2.5.  Additional Signaling

3.3.  Tunnel Payload Requirements

3.3.1.  Extensible Data Types

3.3.2.  Request/Challenge Response Operation

3.3.3.  Mandatory and Optional Attributes

3.3.4.  Vendor Specific Support

3.3.5.  Result Indication

3.4.  Channel Binding Requirements

3.4.1.  Definition

3.4.2.  Directionality

3.4.3.  Data Types

3.5.  Requirements Associated with Carrying Username and Passwords

3.5.1.  security

3.5.1.1.  Confidentiality and Integrity

3.5.1.2.  Authentication of Server

3.5.1.3.  Credential Validation (revocation validation)

3.5.2.  Internationalization

3.5.2.1.  Username

3.5.2.2.  Passwords

3.5.3.  Meta-data

Machine vs. User Authentication

3.5.4.  Password Change

3.6.  Requirements Associated with Carrying EAP Methods

3.6.1.  Method Negotiation

3.6.2.  Method Chaining

3.6.3.  Cryptographic Binding with TLS Channel

3.6.4.  Compound Keys

3.6.5.  Intermediate Results

3.6.6.  Client Initiated

3.6.7.  Method meta-data

request specific credentials

4.  IANA Considerations

This document has no IANA considerations.

5.  Security Considerations

6.  References

6.1. Normative References

6.2. Informative References

Author's Address

Full Copyright Statement

Copyright © The IETF Trust (2008).

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, THE IETF TRUST 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 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 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 made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any 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 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org.