<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!-- This template is for creating an Internet Draft using xml2rfc, which is available here: http://xml.resource.org. -->
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
<!-- One method to get references from the online citation libraries.
     There has to be one entity for each item to be referenced. 
     An alternate method (rfc include) is described in the references. -->
<!ENTITY RFC2119 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC2434 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2434.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC3605 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3605.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC3711 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3711.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC3830 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3830.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC4107 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4107.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC4434 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4434.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC4442 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4442.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC4563 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4563.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC4566 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4566.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC4650 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4650.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC4738 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4738.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC5197 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5197.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC5410 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5410.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC6043 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6043.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC6267 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6267.xml">
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-roll-rpl SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.draft-ietf-roll-rpl-19.xml">
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-roll-security-framework SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.draft-ietf-roll-security-framework-06.xml">
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-msec-mikey-ecc SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.draft-ietf-msec-mikey-ecc-03.xml">
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>
<!-- used by XSLT processors -->
<!-- For a complete list and description of processing instructions (PIs), please see http://xml.resource.org/authoring/README.html. -->
<!-- Below are generally applicable Processing Instructions (PIs) that most I-Ds might want to use. (Here they are set differently than their defaults in xml2rfc v1.32) -->
<?rfc strict="yes" ?>
<!-- give errors regarding ID-nits and DTD validation -->
<!-- control the table of contents (ToC) -->
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<!-- generate a ToC -->
<?rfc tocdepth="4"?>
<!-- the number of levels of subsections in ToC. default: 3 -->
<!-- control references -->
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<!-- use symbolic references tags, i.e, [RFC2119] instead of [1] -->
<?rfc sortrefs="yes" ?>
<!-- sort the reference entries alphabetically -->
<!-- control vertical white space (using these PIs as follows is recommended by the RFC Editor) -->
<?rfc compact="yes" ?>
<!-- do not start each main section on a new page -->
<?rfc subcompact="no" ?>
<!-- keep one blank line between list items -->
<!-- end of list of popular I-D processing instructions -->
<rfc category="std" docName="draft-alexander-roll-mikey-lln-key-mgmt-01"
     ipr="trust200902">
  <!-- category values: std, bcp, info, exp, and historic ipr values: full3667, noModification3667, noDerivatives3667 you can add the attributes updates="NNNN" and obsoletes="NNNN" hey will automatically be output with "(if approved)" -->

  <!-- ***** FRONT MATTER ***** -->

  <front>
    <!-- The abbreviated title is used in the page header - it is only necessary if the full title is longer than 39 characters -->

    <title abbrev="MIKEY Extension for LLN">Adapted Multimedia Internet KEYing
    (AMIKEY): An extension of Multimedia Internet KEYing (MIKEY) Methods for
    Generic LLN Environments</title>

    <!-- add 'role="editor"' below for the editors if appropriate -->

    <!-- Another author who claims to be an editor -->

    <author fullname="Roger K. Alexander" initials="R.K." surname="Alexander">
      <organization>Cooper Power Systems</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>20201 Century Blvd. Suite 250</street>

          <!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently -->

          <city>Germantown</city>

          <region>Maryland</region>

          <code>20874</code>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <email>roger.alexander@cooperindustries.com</email>

        <!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added -->
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Tzeta Tsao" initials="T." surname="Tsao">
      <organization>Cooper Power Systems</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>20201 Century Blvd. Suite 250</street>

          <!-- Reorder these if your country does things differently -->

          <city>Germantown</city>

          <region>Maryland</region>

          <code>20874</code>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <email>tzeta.tsao@cooperindustries.com</email>

        <!-- uri and facsimile elements may also be added -->
      </address>
    </author>

    <date month="July" year="2011" />

    <!-- If the month and year are both specified and are the current ones, xml2rfc will fill in the current day for you. If only the current year is specified, xml2rfc will fill in the current day and month for you. If the year is not the current one, it is necessary to specify at least a month (xml2rfc assumes day="1" if not specified for the purpose of calculating the expiry date).  With drafts it is normally sufficient to specify just the year. -->

    <!-- Meta-data Declarations -->

    <area>Routing</area>

    <workgroup>Networking Working Group</workgroup>

    <!-- WG name at the upperleft corner of the doc, IETF is fine for individual submissions. If this element is not present, the default is "Network Working Group", which is used by the RFC Editor as a nod to the history of the IETF. -->

    <keyword>LLN, ROLL, security, key management</keyword>

    <!-- Keywords will be incorporated into HTML output files in a meta tag but they have no effect on text or nroff output. If you submit your draft to the RFC Editor, the keywords will be used for the search engine. -->

    <abstract>
      <t>Multimedia Internet Keying (MIKEY) is a key management protocol used
      for real-time applications. As standardized within RFC3830 it defines
      four key distribution methods, including pre-shared keys, public-key
      encryption, and Diffie-Hellman key exchange, with allowances for ready
      protocol extension. A number of additional methods have been developed
      and continue to be built from the base protocol (see for example,
      RFC4442, RFC4563, RFC4650, RFC4738, RFC5410, RFC6043 and RFC6267.
      However, in spite of its extensibility and more general applicability,
      MIKEY and its related extensions have primarily focused on the support
      of the Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP).</t>

      <t>This document specifies a simple adaptation of the MIKEY
      specification to allow the base protocol and its various key management
      mode extensions to be readily applied in more general environments
      beyond the multimedia SRTP domain. In particular, the document defines a
      repurposing of the MIKEY multimedia crypto sessions structure and
      introduces a set of message extensions to the base specification to
      allow the MIKEY key management methods to be applied within Low-power
      and Lossy networks (LLNs) and other general constrained-device
      networks.</t>
    </abstract>

    <note title="Requirements Language">
      <t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
      "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
      "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in <xref
      target="RFC2119">RFC 2119</xref>.</t>
    </note>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <section anchor="intro" title="Introduction">
      <t>Any sufficiently large scale network offering security services
      requires an automated key management mechanism for the exchange of keys
      and the update of related security credentials <xref
      target="RFC4107"></xref>. Key management may be needed for individual
      session exchanges or for the long-term control and update of security
      parameters from which session keys may be derived. In many Low-power and
      Lossy networks (LLN) and other constrained-device environments, key
      management emphasis is often on the management of long-term keys. This
      may automatically follow network associations based on device
      pre-configuration or may be based on specified key lifetimes or
      administrative or event-driven need for key credential changes. This
      would apply to the case of a network routing protocol like RPL (<xref
      target="I-D.ietf-roll-rpl"></xref>) that employs security as well as to
      other secured communications layer protocols.</t>

      <t>Multimedia Internet Keying (MIKEY) is a key management protocol that
      has been used for real-time applications both for peer-to-peer and group
      communications. The capabilities of the protocol lend themselves just as
      readily to the management of long-term keys as to per-session or per
      association key control. MIKEY <xref target="RFC3830"></xref> defines
      four key distribution methods including pre-shared keys, public-key
      encryption, and Diffie-Hellman key exchange. Given its design
      simplicity, efficiency and flexibility a number of additional modes and
      extensions have indeed been developed and continue to be built from the
      base protocol (see for example, <xref target="RFC4442"></xref>, <xref
      target="RFC4563"></xref>, <xref target="RFC4650"></xref>, <xref
      target="RFC4738"></xref>, <xref target="RFC5410"></xref>, <xref
      target="RFC6043"></xref> and <xref target="RFC6267"></xref>). MIKEY and
      its related RFC extensions have however primarily focused on the support
      of the SRTP and related Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) call scenarios
      <xref target="RFC3711"></xref>.</t>

      <t>This document specifies an adaptation of the MIKEY protocol
      specification to allow the base protocol and its various key management
      mode extensions to be more generally applied to LLN environments. In
      particular, the document defines a repurposing of the MIKEY multimedia
      crypto sessions structure to allow optional support for simultaneous
      management of multiple protocol or device interface key. The
      specification also introduces a set of message extensions to the base
      MIKEY protocol to allow its key management methods to be applied within
      generic LLN and constrained-device networks.</t>

      <section anchor="motivation" title="Motivation">
        <t>Key distribution describes the process of delivering cryptographic
        keys to the required communicating parties. The MIKEY protocol has
        defined the mechanisms for establishing the security context used by
        SRTP however the mechanisms for security parameter negotiation and
        update is just as readily extended to LLN protocols.</t>

        <t>The flexibly to employ different key distribution methods according
        to available network infrastructure and particular operating scenarios
        together with the compact efficiency of its binary specification makes
        MIKEY well suited for general LLN use. The wide range of key
        management support extending from light-weight, low latency half
        round-trip pre-shared key distribution methods to multi-exchange
        Diffie-Hellman key agreements protected with digital signatures or
        pre-shared keys offers great flexibility to meet the needs of diverse
        LLN application environments.</t>

        <t>The option to embed the MIKEY key management messages within an
        existing network signaling protocol or to be directly transported or
        UDP or TCP (using port 2269) also increases the ability to apply the
        methods in more general LLN domains.</t>

        <t>MIKEY has met its original stated design goals <xref
        target="RFC3830"></xref> of end-to-end security, simplicity,
        efficiency, tunneling (even beyond integration with Session
        Description Protocol (SDP) <xref target="RFC4566"></xref> or RTCP
        <xref target="RFC3605"></xref>), and independence of underlying
        transport. In so doing it offers an excellent base for a generic key
        management protocol for Low-power Lossy Network (LLN) application. Key
        management protocols are also difficult to design and validate (see
        <xref target="RFC4107"></xref> guidelines) providing a further
        motivation for reliance on an established protocol like MIKEY that has
        had the benefit of wider operational deployment and evaluation.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="MIKEY Key Management Methods Background">
        <t>As noted in <xref target="RFC5197"></xref>, several key
        distribution methods have been described for MIKEY, including: <list
            style="symbols">
            <t>Symmetric key distribution as defined in <xref
            target="RFC3830"></xref> (MIKEY-PSK)</t>

            <t>Asymmetric key distribution as defined in <xref
            target="RFC3830"></xref> (MIKEY-RSA)</t>

            <t>Diffie-Hellman key agreement protected by digital signatures as
            defined in <xref target="RFC3830"></xref> (MIKEY-DHSIGN)</t>

            <t>Diffie-Hellman key agreement protected by symmetric pre-shared
            keys as defined in <xref target="RFC4650"></xref>
            (MIKEY-DHHMAC)</t>

            <t>Asymmetric key distribution (based on asymmetric encryption)
            with in-band certificate provision as defined in <xref
            target="RFC4738"></xref> (MIKEY-RSA-R)</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>Further extensions to MIKEY comprising algorithm enhancements and
        new payload definitions have since been defined generally motivated by
        the specific problems associated with SIP signaling and associated
        multimedia use case scenarios (see <xref target="RFC5197"></xref>for
        an earlier assessment). This specification proposes a new extension
        that is focused on a new domain of application.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Adapting MIKEY to General LLNs">
        <t>This document specifies is a set of additional message information
        elements to the base MIKEY protocol that provide both algorithm and
        message payload extensions. These additions allow the adapted protocol
        to be used directly for key transport and security policy
        specification between communications generic network entities.
        Furthermore, through integration within the base MIKEY specification
        it will allow current and future key methods and extensions to be
        utilized outside of the current multimedia environment.</t>

        <t>The developed protocol adaption includes the specification of
        alternative default algorithms (in particular AES-based) and
        configurations that are particular to more constrained communications
        devices and using MIKEY's general extensibility to define new elements
        applicable to the LLN environment.</t>

        <t>An important element of the protocol extension is the re-use of the
        MIKEY crypto-session structure to apply to individual device
        communications protocol layers or interfaces instead of applying to
        multimedia streams. By maintaining this base protocol structure and
        re-purposing associated message identifiers, the specification
        minimizes the protocol changes needed for network adaptation.</t>

        <t>As with the original specification the intent is to allow MIKEY
        messages to be embedded into existing communications signaling
        protocols or to be independently transported between communicating
        entities over UDP or TCP transport connections.</t>

        <t>Note: While MIKEY and its extensions provide a variety of choices
        in terms of modes of operation, implementations for a given LLN
        application domain will be able to simplify node behavior by operating
        in a single mode. To ensure necessary interoperability within the LLN
        environment, mandatory methods within the Adapted MIKEY protocol
        (AMIKEY), akin to those of MIKEY, shall be specified.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Terminology and Definitions">
        <t>The following definitions have been taken from <xref
        target="RFC3830"></xref> with necessary augmentation for AMIKEY as
        indicated:</t>

        <t><list hangIndent="6" style="hanging">
            <t hangText="(Data) Security Protocol"><vspace /> The security
            protocol used to protect the actual data traffic. Examples of
            security protocols are IPsec and SRTP. For generic LLNs, security
            protocols may include secure versions of protocols such as RPL
            <xref target="I-D.ietf-roll-rpl"></xref>.</t>

            <t hangText="Data SA"><vspace /> Data Security Association
            information for the security protocol, including a TEK and a set
            of parameters/policies.</t>

            <t hangText="CS">Crypto Session, uni- or bidirectional data
            stream(s) protected by a single instance of a security protocol.
            For AMIKEY the concept of a crypto-session is expanded to allow
            definition of a particular protocol layer, logical device
            interface, or other communications association for which key
            management support is provided.</t>

            <t hangText="CSB">Crypto Session Bundle, collection of one or more
            Crypto Sessions, which can have common TGKs (see below) and
            security parameters.</t>

            <t hangText="CS ID">Crypto Session ID, unique identifier for the
            CS within a CSB. For AMIKEY the CS ID is used to identify a
            specific protocol layer, logical device interface or other
            communications association for which AMIKEY is being used to
            support key management (establishment of re-keying update).</t>

            <t hangText="CSB ID"><vspace /> Crypto Session Bundle ID, unique
            identifier for the CSB. For AMIKEY the CSB ID in conjunction with
            the Timestamp filed is used as a unique key management exchange
            message reference identifier. This identifier will allow for the
            acknowledged key management message exchanges where applicable.
            The ID plus timestamp will also support the filtering of repeated
            or redundant AMIKEY messages when key management occurs over an
            unreliable transport network.</t>

            <t hangText="TGK">TEK Generation Key, a bit-string agreed upon by
            two or more parties, associated with CSB. From the TGK,
            Traffic-Encrypting Keys can then be generated without needing
            further communication.</t>

            <t hangText="TEK">Traffic-Encrypting Key, the key used by the
            security protocol to protect the CS (this key may be used directly
            by the security protocol or may be used to derive further keys
            depending on the security protocol). The TEKs are derived from the
            CSB's TGK.</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>The following definitions have been added to the ones from <xref
        target="RFC3830"></xref> specifically related to supporting
        AMIKEY:</t>

        <t><list hangIndent="6" style="hanging">
            <t hangText="Key Index"><vspace />The Key Index (KI) is used as
            identifier to allow for reference to the key(s) that are
            associated with a given CS. Where TEKs may be updated over time a
            TGK can be associated with a KI that is transported as a payload
            within the AMIKEY message from the Initiator. Any TEK generated
            from the AMIKEY TGK shall be assigned the key index value
            associated with the TGK. Within general LLN protocol
            communications related to a given CS (device layer protocol or
            interface), to ensure security association synchronization
            reference can be made to the key index that is being applied for
            the given protocol security. Following successfully TGK key
            establishment communicating devices can verify security contexts
            through reference to maintained KI (see <xref
            target="key-index"></xref>).</t>

            <t hangText="Key Source Identifier"><vspace />The Key Source
            Identifier (KSI) is used as a logical identifier to allow for
            refernece to the entity associated with the origination of a given
            TGK. Where TEKs are dynamically generated or updated, each TGK can
            be associated with a specific key source. The KSI, when used, is
            transported as a payload within the AMIKEY message from the entity
            responsible for the TGK origination (see <xref
            target="key-source"></xref>).</t>
          </list></t>
      </section>

      <section title="Document Outline">
        <t><xref target="overview"></xref> provides a brief general system
        overview of key management as introduced in MIKEY specification. This
        section generalizes the context in which the Adapted MIKEY (AMIKEY)
        protocol extension is applied. It also provides a reference to the
        common key management operating base of MIKEY and AMIKEY.</t>

        <t>Sections <xref format="counter" target="extension-elem"></xref> to
        <xref format="counter" target="mgmt-func"></xref> go into further
        detail by identifying the specific section and subsection extensions
        and enhancements needed to support the MIKEY protocol adaptation.
        These Sections mirror those of MIKEY <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>
        and are used to show the necessary commonality and make reference to
        specific changes would be required for AMIKEY. Reference is made only
        to the applicable Sections and Subsections of <xref
        target="RFC3830"></xref> for which special changes are proposed.</t>

        <t><xref target="payload"></xref> includes the specific protocol
        specification elements that are needed to extend MIKEY for the support
        of the generic LLN key management requirements.</t>

        <t>The remaining document sections are place-holders for standard RFC
        draft sections.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Section Headings Notation">
        <t>This document is written as a delta document to <xref
        target="RFC3830"></xref>. For ease of cross-reference and to maintain
        consistency with the MIKEY specification document structure, Section
        heading and Table and Figure numbers are maintained consistent with
        the <xref target="RFC3830"></xref> usage.</t>

        <t>The notation of Section number followed by <xref
        target="RFC3830"></xref> "x.x. <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>" is used
        is this document for Sections specifically meant to align with <xref
        target="RFC3830"></xref>. Section numbers followed by <xref
        target="RFC3830"></xref> with additional heading text indicates some
        new element or clarification introduced by this specification. Section
        numbers followed by <xref target="RFC3830"></xref> without further
        heading text implies no change to <xref target="RFC3830"></xref> and
        is used only to align and maintain the current document headings
        structure.</t>

        <t>The new parameters introduced in this specification are made
        consistent with the MIKEY recommendations (see Section 4.2.9 <xref
        target="RFC3830"></xref>).</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section anchor="overview" title="AMIKEY Overview">
      <t>This section provides an overview of AMIKEY. Material from MIKEY
      <xref target="RFC3830"></xref> is also repeated to clearly establish the
      common context in which MIKEY can be applied to LLN environments with
      the simple extension to the Adapted MIKEY (AMIKEY) specification.</t>

      <t>The objective of the AMIKEY extension is exactly the same as that of
      MIKEY - "to produce a data security association (SA) for a security
      protocol, including a Traffic-Encrypting Key (TEK), which is derived
      from a TEK Generation Key (TGK), and used as input for the security
      protocol." In the case of AMIKEY the objective is support generic
      security protocols and particularly those that may be associated with
      LLNs.</t>

      <t>AMIKEY uses the specified MIKEY mechanisms and features to "support
      the possibility of establishing keys and parameters for more than one
      security protocol (or for several instances of the same security
      protocol) at the same time." In MIKEY the Crypto Session Bundle (CSB),
      which derives from the multimedia (multi-stream) context, is used to
      denote this collection of one or more Crypto Sessions that can have a
      common TGK and security parameters, but that obtain distinct TEKs from
      MIKEY.</t>

      <t>In the AMIKEY extension, the concept of CSB is used to provide the
      option of simultaneously establishing multiple SAs on a given device.
      The individual Crypto Session (CS) SAs may be associated with different
      device layer or device interface security protocols. AMIKEY further uses
      the flexibility of the MIKEY specification to allow separate security
      policies to be defined in the SA established for each security protocol.
      The distribution mechanisms defined by MIKEY for re-keying and updating
      of established security associations is hence also directly applied. The
      ability to establish and maintain multiple SAs through a single key
      management association provides an important efficiency element in LLN
      domains.</t>

      <t>As specified in <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>, Section 2.3, the
      procedure of setting up a CSB and creating a TEK (and Data SA), is done
      in accordance with <xref target="fig1"></xref>: <list style="numbers">
          <t>A set of security parameters and TGK(s) are agreed upon for the
          Crypto Session Bundle. This is done by one of many alternative key
          transport/exchange mechanisms (see <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>,
          Section 3, as well as subsequent extension RFCs).</t>

          <t>The TGK(s) is used to derive (in a cryptographically secure way)
          a TEK for each Crypto Session or associated security protocol.</t>

          <t>The TEK, together with the security protocol parameters,
          represent the Data SA, which is used as the input to the security
          protocol(s).</t>
        </list></t>

      <figure align="center" anchor="fig1"
              title="Overview of MIKEY (and AMIKEY extension) key management procedure">
        <preamble></preamble>

        <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[

        +-----------------+
        |       CSB       |
        |  Key transport  | (see [RFC3830], Section 3)
        |    /exchange    | 
        +-----------------+
                 |      :
                 | TGK  :
                 v      :
           +----------+ : 
   CS ID ->|   TEK    | : Security protocol parameters (policies)
           |derivation| : (see [RFC3830], Section 4)
           +----------+ : 
              TEK |     :
                  v     v
                  Data SA
                    |
                    v
           +-------------------+
           |  Crypto Session   |
           |(Security Protocol)|
           +-------------------+

            ]]></artwork>

        <postamble></postamble>
      </figure>

      <t>For generic LLNs that are the focus of this document, the default
      algorithms applied in the generation of the TEK for each protocol is
      defined within this AMIKEY specification. An additional MIKEY message
      extension is also specified to define the security protocol parameters
      (policies) for generic LLNs.</t>

      <t>Whereas MIKEY CS IDs are associated with multimedia streams and have
      no intrinsic designation, in this specification the CS IDs are assigned
      values (public or private/vendor-specific) that are used to identify
      security protocols associated with specific device protocol layers or
      device interfaces.</t>

      <t>As considered for the device security model discussed in <xref
      target="I-D.ietf-roll-security-framework"></xref>, Section 6.5, <xref
      target="fig1b"></xref> provides an overview of the key management
      context introduced by the AMIKEY extension defined in this
      specification. The multi-protocol key management capability (through the
      particular use of the MIKEY CS-IDs) allows for the efficient,
      simultaneous management and update of one or more protocol layer
      security parameters.</t>

      <figure align="center" anchor="fig1b"
              title="Overview of AMIKEY Multi-protocol Key Management Context">
        <preamble></preamble>

        <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[

.............................          .............................
: +----------+              :          :              +----------+ :
: |+--------+|              :          :              |+--------+| :
: || AMIKEY ||              :  AMIKEY  :              || AMIKEY || :
: || Key    |<========================================>| Key    || :
: || Mgmt.  ||           Key Exchange (TGK)           || Mgmt.  || :
: || Entity ||              :          :              || Entity || :
: |+--------+|              :          :              |+--------+| :
: | Security |   Node i     :          :     Node j   | Security | :
: | Services |              :          :              | Services | :
: | Entity   |              :          :              | Entity   | :
: +----------+              :          :              +----------+ :
:  |                        :          :                        |  :
:  |           +-----------+:          :+-----------+           |  :
:  | (CSi)+--->| Protocol-i|:          :| Protocol-i|<---+(CSi) |  :
:  |      |    +-----------+:          :+-----------+    |      |  :
:  |      |  +-----------+  :          :  +-----------+  |      |  :
:  | (CS7)|->|Application|  :          :  |Application|<-|(CS7) |  :
:  |      |  +-----------+  :          :  +-----------+  |      |  :
:  |      |  +-----------+  :          :  +-----------+  |      |  :
:  | (CS4)|->| Transport |  :          :  | Transport |<-|(CS4) |  :
:  |      |  +-----------+  :          :  +-----------+  |      |  :
:  +------|                 :          :                 |------+  :
:         |  +-----------+  :          :  +-----------+  |         :
:    (CS3)|->|  Network  |  :          :  |  Network  |<-|(CS3)    :
:         |  +-----------+  :          :  +-----------+  |         :
:         |  +-----------+  :          :  +-----------+  |         :
:    (CS2)|->|     L2    |  :          :  |     L2    |<-|(CS2)    :
:         |  +-----------+  :          :  +-----------+  |         :
:         |  +-----------+  :          :  +-----------+  |         :
:    (CS1)+->|     L1    |  :          :  |     L1    |<-+(CS1)    :
:            +-----------+  :          :  +-----------+            :
:...........................:          :...........................:
 
            ]]></artwork>

        <postamble></postamble>
      </figure>

      <t>As in the base MIKEY specification, the security protocol can either
      use the TEK directly, or, if supported, derive further session keys from
      the TEK. It is however up to the targeted security protocol and the
      associated security policy to define how the TEK is used.</t>

      <t>MIKEY can be used to update TEKs and the Crypto Sessions in a current
      Crypto Session Bundle (see <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>, Section 4.5).
      This is done by executing the transport/exchange phase once again to
      obtain a new TGK (and consequently derive new TEKs) or to update some
      other specific CS parameters.</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="extension-elem" title="AMIKEY Extension Elements">
      <t>The following Section and Subsections detail the proposed additions
      to the MIKEY specification <xref target="RFC3830"></xref> to support the
      AMIKEY extension. The Section heading outline of the MIKEY specification
      is used to indicate the delta changes made by the AMIKEY extension.</t>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Pre-shared key"></section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Public-Key Encryption"></section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Diffie-Hellman Key Exchange"></section>
    </section>

    <section anchor="mgmt-func"
             title="[RFC3830] Selected Key Management Functions">
      <t>For AMIKEY all the key derivation functionality defined in MIKEY
      shall be based on a new default Pseudo-Random Function (PRF) given by
      the AES-based, AES-XCBC-PRF-128 algorithm as specified in <xref
      target="RFC4434"></xref>.</t>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Key Calculation">
        <section title="[RFC3830] Assumptions">
          <t>For AMIKEY cs_id is defined so that session represents a protocol
          layer, logical device interface, or communications association. The
          cs-id values shall be as defined in this specification (see <xref
          target="map-type"></xref>) and may be public or
          private/vendor-specific.</t>
        </section>

        <section anchor="default-prf"
                 title="[RFC3830] Default PRF Description">
          <t>For AMIKEY the default pseudo random function shall be
          AES-XCBC-PRF-128 <xref target="RFC4434"></xref>. Note:
          AES-XCBC-PRF-128 aligns with HMAC-SHA1 and HMAC-MD5 as PRFs.</t>
        </section>

        <section title="[RFC3830] Generating Keys from TGK">
          <t>For AMIKEY the cs-id values shall be as defined in this
          specification (see <xref target="map-type"></xref>).</t>
        </section>

        <section anchor="gen-key-from-env-pre"
                 title="[RFC3830] Generating Keys for MIKEY Messages from an Envelope/Pre-shared Key">
          <t>Change from default PRF to the default AMIKEY PRF given in <xref
          target="default-prf"></xref> of this specification.</t>

          <t>Note: For AMIKEY, the Authentication key constant SHALL be used
          for generating the single TEK in the case of authenticated
          encryption algorithms (such as AES-CCM).</t>
        </section>
      </section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Pre-defined Transforms and Timestamp Formats">
        <section title="[RFC3830] Hash Functions">
          <t>For AMIKEY the default hash function shall be AES-XCBC-PRF-128
          <xref target="RFC4434"></xref>.</t>
        </section>

        <section title="[RFC3830] Pseudo-Random Number Generator">
          <t>For AMIKEY it shall be MANDATORY to implement the new default
          AES-XCBC-PRF-128 PRF specified in <xref target="RFC4434"></xref>
          (See <xref target="default-prf"></xref> of this specification).</t>
        </section>

        <section title="[RFC3830] Key Data Transport Encryption">
          <t>As in MIKEY the default and mandatory-to-implement key transport
          encryption shall be AES in Counter mode using a 128-bit key (derived
          as defined in <xref target="gen-key-from-env-pre"></xref> above).
          The applied Counter shall be the IV defined in <xref
          target="RFC3830"></xref>, Section 4.2.3.</t>
        </section>

        <section anchor="mac-function"
                 title="[RFC3830] MAC Verification Message Function">
          <t>For AMIKEY AES-CCM-64 shall be the defined default for key
          message authentication. The Counter used shall be the IV defined in
          <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>, Section 4.2.3.</t>
        </section>
      </section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Certificates, Policies and Authorization"></section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Retrieving the Data SA">
        <t>For AMIKEY the retrieval of a Data SA will depend on the security
        protocol. The support for different security protocols shall be
        explicitly identified through the use of public CS ID values (see
        <xref target="map-type"></xref> of this specification).</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="[RFC3830] Behavior and Message Handling"></section>

    <section anchor="payload" title="[RFC3830] Payload Encoding">
      <t>The generic LLN security protocol parameters may be transported
      between peers as part of a key establishment or re-keying exchange.
      Based on IANA registration, MIKEY currently only defines two payloads
      for transporting the security policy information (see Section 6.10 of
      <xref target="RFC3830"></xref> and [RFC4442]). This section describes
      the extension of MIKEY to allow the transport of Generic LLN security
      policy information and associated key(s) as well as applicable PRF used
      for key derivation.</t>

      <t>This section describes, in detail, the payload for support of the
      Generic LLN security protocol(s) specified by the Adapted MIKEY
      protocol. As in RFC3830, for all encoding, network byte order is always
      used, and the sign ~ indicates a variable length field.</t>

      <section anchor="common-hdr"
               title="[RFC3830] Common Header Payload (HDR)">
        <t>The Common Header payload MUST always be present as the first
        payload in each message. The Common Header includes a general
        description of the exchange message.</t>

        <figure align="center" anchor="fig2" title="Common Header [RFC3830]">
          <preamble></preamble>

          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[

  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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 !  version      !  data type    ! next payload  !V! PRF func    !
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 !                         CSB ID                                !
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 ! #CS           ! CS ID map type! CS ID map info                ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

	  ]]></artwork>

          <postamble></postamble>
        </figure>

        <t><list style="symbols">
            <t>version (8 bits): the version number of MIKEY.</t>

            <t>version = 0x01 refers to MIKEY as defined and maintained in
            <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>.</t>

            <t>version = 0x03 (to be assigned by IANA) shall be used to refer
            to AMIKEY as defined and maintained in this document.</t>

            <t>data type (8 bits): describes the type of message (e.g.,
            public-key transport message, verification message, error
            message). See latest IANA registered values. No additional values
            are specified for AMIKEY (TBD).</t>

            <t>next payload (8 bits): identifies the payload that is added
            after this payload. See latest IANA registered values.</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>For AMIKEY a new next payload value is assigned to carry the Key
        Index parameter (see also <xref target="key-index"></xref>).</t>

        <texttable title="Table 6.1.b">
          <ttcol align="left">Next Payload</ttcol>

          <ttcol align="center">Value</ttcol>

          <ttcol align="left">Section</ttcol>

          <c>Last payload</c>

          <c>0</c>

          <c>-</c>

          <c>...</c>

          <c></c>

          <c></c>

          <c>Key Index</c>

          <c>n</c>

          <c><xref target="key-index"></xref> as given by the AMIKEY
          specification (value to be assigned by IANA).</c>

          <c>Key act time</c>

          <c>m</c>

          <c><xref target="key-act-time"></xref> as given by the AMIKEY
          specification (value to be assigned by IANA)</c>

          <postamble></postamble>
        </texttable>

        <t><list style="symbols">
            <t>V (1 bit): flag to indicate whether a verification message is
            expected or not (this only has meaning when it is set by the
            Initiator).</t>

            <t>PRF func (7 bits): indicates the PRF function that has
            been/will be used for key derivation; for AMIKEY a new value, 2,
            has been specified to indicate the PRF that must be supported for
            LLNs.</t>
          </list></t>

        <texttable title="Table 6.1.c">
          <ttcol align="left">PRF Function</ttcol>

          <ttcol align="center">Value</ttcol>

          <ttcol align="left">Comments</ttcol>

          <c>AES-XCBC-PRF-128</c>

          <c>2</c>

          <c>As specified in <xref target="RFC4434"></xref> and that shall be
          mandatory for AMIKEY</c>

          <postamble></postamble>
        </texttable>

        <t>(AMIKEY value to be assigned by IANA)</t>

        <t><list style="symbols">
            <t>CSB ID (32 bits): identifies the CSB (generated as specified in
            <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>); for AMIKEY this field is used as
            a message reference identifier to allow for duplicate detection
            where message exchanges occur over an unreliable transport
            network.</t>

            <t>#CS (8 bits): indicates the number of Crypto Sessions that will
            be handled within the CBS; for AMIKEY this field indicates the
            number of protocol layers, logical device interfaces, or other
            communications associations that are being configured or managed
            within the current key management message exchange.</t>

            <t>CS ID map type (8 bits): specifies the method of uniquely
            mapping. Crypto Sessions to the security protocol sessions; for
            AMIKEY a new value, 3, has been specified to indicate the
            Generic-LLN map type that must be supported for LLNs.</t>
          </list></t>

        <texttable title="Table 6.1.d">
          <ttcol align="left">CS ID Map Type</ttcol>

          <ttcol align="center">Value</ttcol>

          <ttcol align="left">Comments</ttcol>

          <c>Generic_LLN-ID</c>

          <c>3</c>

          <c>As specified in this document and as mandatory for AMIKEY</c>

          <postamble></postamble>
        </texttable>

        <t>(AMIKEY value to be assigned by IANA)</t>

        <t><list style="symbols">
            <t>CS ID map info (variable length): identifies the crypto
            session(s) for which the SA should be created. For AMIKEY the
            GENERIC_LLN map type (defined in <xref target="map-type"></xref>
            below) is used to specify the security association for the
            individual protocol layers, logical device interfaces, or other
            communications associations for which key management is being
            provided.</t>
          </list></t>

        <section title="[RFC3830] SRTP ID"></section>

        <section anchor="map-type" title="The Generic_LLN-ID Map Type">
          <t>For the Generic_LLN map type, the CS ID map info consists of #CS
          (see <xref target="common-hdr"></xref>) number of blocks or
          segments, where each segment maps policies (and a key) to a specific
          protocol layer, logical device interface or other communications
          association security protocol.</t>

          <figure align="center" anchor="fig3" title="Generic_LLN-ID Map Type">
            <preamble></preamble>

            <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[

  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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 !     CS ID     !       #P      !          Ps (OPTIONAL)        ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

	  ]]></artwork>

            <postamble></postamble>
          </figure>

          <t><list style="symbols">
              <t>CS ID (8 bits): specifies the CS ID used to identify a given
              security protocol; for AMIKEY, when used in conjunction with the
              Generic-LLN map type, values 0-127 shall be reserved for
              assignment (by IANA) to specific protocol layer, logical device
              interface, or other communications association security
              protocols while values 128-255 shall be Reserved for Private
              Use.</t>
            </list></t>

          <t>Note: A combination of public and private CS IDs can be specified
          within a given CSB when combined key management is being
          applied.</t>

          <t>The following values are currently specified in this document
          (for example, with values to be assigned by IANA):</t>

          <texttable title="Table 6.1.e">
            <ttcol align="left">CS ID</ttcol>

            <ttcol align="center">Value</ttcol>

            <ttcol align="left">Comments</ttcol>

            <c>Reserved</c>

            <c>0</c>

            <c></c>

            <c>Generic PHY Layer</c>

            <c>1</c>

            <c></c>

            <c>Generic Link Layer</c>

            <c>2</c>

            <c></c>

            <c>Generic Network Layer</c>

            <c>3</c>

            <c></c>

            <c>Generic Transport Layer</c>

            <c>4</c>

            <c></c>

            <c>Generic Application Layer</c>

            <c>7</c>

            <c></c>

            <c>RPL Protocol</c>

            <c>20</c>

            <c></c>

            <c>...</c>

            <c></c>

            <c></c>

            <c>Reserved values</c>

            <c>128-255</c>

            <c>Reserved for private use</c>

            <postamble></postamble>
          </texttable>

          <t><list style="symbols">
              <t>#P (8 bits): indicates the number of security policies
              provided for the crypto session (given by the CS ID) for which
              key management is being provided. In response messages, #P SHALL
              always be exactly 1. So if #P = 0 in an initial message, a
              security profile MUST be provided in the response message. If #P
              &gt; 0, one of the suggested policies SHOULD be chosen in the
              response message. If needed, the suggested policies MAY be
              changed.</t>

              <t>Ps (variable length): lists the policies for the crypto
              session for which key management is being provided. It SHALL
              contain exactly #P policies, each having the specified Prot type
              (see <xref target="sp-payload"></xref>.</t>
            </list></t>

          <figure align="center" anchor="fig4" title="Policies">
            <preamble></preamble>

            <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[

  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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 !  Policy_no_i  !  Policy_no_n  !      ...      ! Policy_no_#P  !
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

	  ]]></artwork>

            <postamble></postamble>
          </figure>

          <t><list style="symbols">
              <t>Policy_no_i (8 bits): a policy_no that corresponds to the
              policy_no of a SP payload. In response messages, the policy_no
              may refer to a SP payload in the initial message. The policy
              numbers should be listed in increasing order.</t>
            </list></t>
        </section>
      </section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Key Data Transport Payload (KEMAC)">
        <t>This section shall apply entirely as specified for MIKEY in <xref
        target="RFC3830"></xref> with the addition of the specific message
        authentication code algorithms given below for AMIKEY.</t>

        <t><list style="symbols">
            <t>MAC alg (8 bits): specifies the authentication algorithm
            used.</t>
          </list></t>

        <texttable title="Table 6.2.b">
          <ttcol align="left">MAC alg</ttcol>

          <ttcol align="center">Value</ttcol>

          <ttcol align="left">Comments</ttcol>

          <ttcol align="center">Length (bits)</ttcol>

          <c>NULL</c>

          <c>0</c>

          <c>restricted usage <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>, Section
          4.2.4</c>

          <c>0</c>

          <c>HMAC-SHA-1-160</c>

          <c>1</c>

          <c>Mandatory, <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>, Section 4.2.4</c>

          <c>160</c>

          <c>HMAC-SHA-256-256</c>

          <c>2</c>

          <c>Mandatory, <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>, Section 4.2.4</c>

          <c>256</c>

          <c>AES-CBC-MAC-32</c>

          <c>3</c>

          <c>Mandatory for AMIKEY, see <xref target="mac-function"></xref></c>

          <c>32</c>

          <c>AES-CBC-MAC-64</c>

          <c>4</c>

          <c>Mandatory for AMIKEY, see <xref target="mac-function"></xref></c>

          <c>64</c>

          <c>AES-CBC-MAC-128</c>

          <c>5</c>

          <c>Mandatory for AMIKEY, see <xref target="mac-function"></xref></c>

          <c>128</c>

          <postamble></postamble>
        </texttable>

        <t>(Values for AMIKEY to be assigned by IANA)</t>

        <t><list style="symbols">
            <t>MAC (variable length): the message authentication code of the
            entire message.</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>For AMIKEY the use of AES-CBC-MAC-n may be applied in conjunction
        with the AES-CM encryption as given by the Encr alg field. This
        authenticated encryption shall be applied using an AES-CCM-n
        implementation.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Envelope Data Payload (PKE)"></section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] DH Data Payload (DH)"></section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Signature Payload (SIGN)"></section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Timestamp Payload (T)"></section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] ID Payload (ID)">
        <t>For AMIKEY the range of ID types shall be extended to allow for an
        expanded array of communications protocol entities that may be key
        management participants. The IDs are carried within the key management
        message ID payload field with the TLV format as specified in <xref
        target="RFC3830"></xref>, Section 6.7.</t>

        <texttable title="Table 6.7.a">
          <ttcol align="left">ID Type</ttcol>

          <ttcol align="center">Value</ttcol>

          <ttcol align="left">Comments</ttcol>

          <c>IPv6 Address</c>

          <c>4</c>

          <c>As specified for AMIKEY</c>

          <c>Device MAC Address</c>

          <c>5</c>

          <c>As specified for AMIKEY</c>

          <c>Other (TBD)</c>

          <c>n</c>

          <c>As specified for AMIKEY</c>

          <postamble></postamble>
        </texttable>

        <t>The IPv6 Address ID type is used to allow an IPv6 Address to be
        referenced as the unique entity identifier of the key management
        correspondents. To directly reference the IPv6 Address of the
        exchanged packets, the ID len value will be set to zero and no ID data
        included in the value field.</t>

        <t>The Device MAC Address is used to allow a MAC address to be
        referenced as the unique entity identifier for correspondents in a key
        management exchange.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Cert Hash Payload (CHASH)"></section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Ver msg payload (V)"></section>

      <section anchor="sp-payload"
               title="[RFC3830] Security Policy (SP) Payload">
        <t>The Security Policy payload defines a set of policies that apply to
        a specific security protocol.</t>

        <t>For AMIKEY the definition is based on the same security policy
        payload definition in <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>, Section 6.10,
        with a new security protocol (Generic-LLN) as defined below.</t>

        <figure align="center">
          <preamble></preamble>

          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[

  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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 ! Next payload  ! Policy no     ! Prot type     ! Policy param  ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 ~ length (cont) ! Policy param                                  ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   ]]></artwork>

          <postamble></postamble>
        </figure>

        <t><list style="symbols">
            <t>Next payload (8 bits): Identifies the payload that is added
            after this payload. See Section 6.1 of <xref
            target="RFC3830"></xref> for more details.</t>

            <t>Policy no (8 bits): Each security policy payload must be given
            a distinct number for the current MIKEY session by the local peer.
            This number is used to map a cryptographic session to a specific
            policy (see also Section 6.1.1 of <xref
            target="RFC3830"></xref>).</t>

            <t>Prot type (8 bits): This value defines the security protocol;
            For AMIKEY an additional value shall be assigned as given
            below.</t>
          </list></t>

        <texttable title="Table 6.10">
          <ttcol align="left">Prot Type</ttcol>

          <ttcol align="center">Value</ttcol>

          <ttcol align="center">Comments</ttcol>

          <c>Generic_LLN</c>

          <c>3</c>

          <c>As specified for AMIKEY</c>

          <postamble></postamble>
        </texttable>

        <t><list style="symbols">
            <t>Policy param length (16 bits): This field defines the total
            length of the policy parameters for the selected security
            protocol.</t>

            <t>Policy param (variable length): This field defines the policy
            for the specific security protocol. The Policy param part is built
            up by a set of Type/Length/Value (TLV) payloads. For each security
            protocol, a set of possible type/value pairs can be negotiated as
            defined.</t>
          </list></t>

        <figure align="center" anchor="fig7" title="Policy Parameter">
          <preamble></preamble>

          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[

  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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 ! Type          ! Length        ! Value                         ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


   ]]></artwork>

          <postamble></postamble>
        </figure>

        <t><list style="symbols">
            <t>Type (8 bits): Specifies the type of the parameter.</t>

            <t>Length (8 bits): Specifies the length of the Value field (in
            bytes).</t>

            <t>Value (variable length): Specifies the value of the
            parameter.</t>
          </list></t>

        <section title="[RFC3830] SRTP Policy"></section>

        <section title="AMIKEY Generic_LLN Policy">
          <t>This policy specifies the parameters for the Generic_LLN (G_LLN)
          protocol for which key management is being provided. The
          types/values that can be negotiated are defined by the following
          table for the known, assigned CS ID values. For Vendor-specific,
          private CS ID values the applicable policy specification for a given
          crypto session will be left to the communicating parties.</t>

          <texttable title="Table 6.10.2.a">
            <ttcol align="center">Type</ttcol>

            <ttcol align="left">Meaning</ttcol>

            <ttcol align="left">Possible Values</ttcol>

            <c>0</c>

            <c>Encryption algorithm</c>

            <c>See below</c>

            <c>1</c>

            <c>Encryption key length</c>

            <c>Depends on cipher used</c>

            <c>2</c>

            <c>Authentication algorithm</c>

            <c>See below</c>

            <c>3</c>

            <c>Authentication key length</c>

            <c>Depends on MAC used</c>

            <c>4</c>

            <c>Generic LLN PRF</c>

            <c>See below</c>

            <c>5</c>

            <c>Encryption off/on</c>

            <c>0 if off, 1 if on</c>

            <postamble></postamble>
          </texttable>

          <t>For the Encryption algorithm, a one byte length is sufficient.
          For AMIKEY the currently defined possible Values are:</t>

          <texttable title="Table 6.10.2.b">
            <ttcol align="left">G_LLN encr alg</ttcol>

            <ttcol align="center">Value</ttcol>

            <c>NULL</c>

            <c>0</c>

            <c>AES-CM-128</c>

            <c>1</c>

            <postamble></postamble>
          </texttable>

          <t>For the Authentication algorithm, a one byte length is
          sufficient. For AMIKEY the currently defined possible Values
          are:</t>

          <texttable title="Table 6.10.2.c">
            <ttcol align="left">G_LLN auth alg</ttcol>

            <ttcol align="center">Value</ttcol>

            <ttcol align="left">Comments</ttcol>

            <c>NULL</c>

            <c>0</c>

            <c>Not recommended for operational use</c>

            <c>AES-CBC-MAC-32</c>

            <c>1</c>

            <c></c>

            <c>AES-CBC-MAC-64</c>

            <c>2</c>

            <c></c>

            <c>AES-CBC-MAC-128</c>

            <c>3</c>

            <c></c>

            <c>RSA-SHA-256 Sig</c>

            <c>4</c>

            <c></c>

            <postamble></postamble>
          </texttable>

          <t>Note: Since authentication is mandatory for operational protocol
          security, where Encryption is set "on" by the Generic_LLN policy,
          authenticated encryption, AES-CCM-n, with the MAC size given by the
          selected authentication algorithm, or AES-CM with authentication
          given by the identified Signature algorithm, shall be applied.</t>

          <t>For the Generic_LLN pseudo-random function, a one byte length is
          also sufficient. For AMIKEY the currently defined possible Values
          are:</t>

          <texttable title="Table 6.10.2.d">
            <ttcol align="left">Generic_LLN PRF</ttcol>

            <ttcol align="center">Value</ttcol>

            <c>AES-XCBC-PRF-128</c>

            <c>0</c>

            <postamble></postamble>
          </texttable>
        </section>
      </section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] RAND Payload (RAND)"></section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Error Payload (ERR)"></section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Key Data Sub-Payload"></section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] Key Validity Data"></section>

      <section title="[RFC3830] General Extension Payload"></section>

      <section anchor="key-index" title="Key Index Payload">
        <t>For AMIKEY the Key Index (KI) payload is used to specify the value
        of the key index associated with a given TGK.</t>

        <figure align="center" anchor="fig8" title="Key Index">
          <preamble></preamble>

          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[

  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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 !  Next Payload !     KI len    !     KI value (variable)       ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   ]]></artwork>

          <postamble></postamble>
        </figure>

        <t><list style="symbols">
            <t>Next payload (8 bits): identifies the payload that is added
            after this payload. See Section 6.1 <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>
            for values.</t>

            <t>KI len (8 bits): indicates the length of the key source
            identifier field.</t>

            <t>KI value (variable length): indicates the value of the key
            index to be assigned to any CS TEK generated from the transported
            TGK.</t>
          </list></t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="key-source" title="Key Source Identifier Payload">
        <t>For AMIKEY the Key Source Identifier payload is used to provide a
        logical reference to the entity associated with the origination of a
        given TGK. The specification of the Key Source Identifier (KSI) shall
        be given by the supported security protocol (for example, the secured
        RPL routing protocol <xref target="I-D.ietf-roll-rpl"></xref>
        specifies the use of an 8-byte KSI).</t>

        <figure align="center" anchor="fig8b" title="Key Source Identifier">
          <preamble></preamble>

          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[

  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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 !  Next Payload !    KSI len    !   KSI value (variable)        ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   ]]></artwork>

          <postamble></postamble>
        </figure>

        <t><list style="symbols">
            <t>Next payload (8 bits): identifies the payload that is added
            after this payload. See Section 6.1 <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>
            for values.</t>

            <t>KSI len (8 bits): indicates the length of the key source
            identifier field.</t>

            <t>KSI value (variable length): specifies the logical identifier
            assigned to the Source or Originator of a given TGK.</t>
          </list></t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="key-act-time" title="Key Activation Time Payload">
        <t>For AMIKEY the Key Activation time payload is used to specify the
        time at which a new key derived from a communicated TGK shall become
        active for the associated device protocol or interface. The Key
        Activation time is used only when needed to specify a delay or future
        activation of an updated key. The format of this AMIKEY information
        element type shall be the same as that of the Timestamp payload (T)
        <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>.</t>

        <figure align="center" anchor="fig9"
                title="Key Activation Time Payload">
          <preamble></preamble>

          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[

  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
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 !  Next Payload !     TS type   !    TS value (variable)        ~
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


   ]]></artwork>

          <postamble></postamble>
        </figure>

        <t><list style="symbols">
            <t>Next payload (8 bits): identifies the payload that is added
            after this payload. See Section 6.1 <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>
            for values.</t>

            <t>TS type (8 bits): indicates the timestamp type use to convey
            the time at which a new derived TEK shall become active (See
            Section 6.6 <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>).</t>

            <t>TS value (variable length): the timestamp value of the
            specified TS type (See Section 6.6 <xref
            target="RFC3830"></xref>).</t>
          </list></t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="[RFC3830] Transport Protocols">
      <t>As in <xref target="RFC3830"></xref>, AMIKEY may be integrated within
      session establishment or other system signaling protocols or may be
      directly transported over UDP or TCP. Where AMIKEY messages are
      integrated into other LLN-related signaling protocols its transport
      shall be defined as part of those protocols.</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="Security" title="Security Considerations">
      <t>A primary motivation for this RFC is the security that comes from a
      re-use of the key management methods and framework developed for MIKEY.
      The extensive deployment and on-going development provides the benefit
      of much wider vetting and validation essential to assuring greater
      security.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="[RFC3830] Groups"></section>

    <section title="Additional Specification Considerations">
      <t>Work had been previously initiated in developing support for an
      ECC-based asymmetric key management method (<xref
      target="I-D.ietf-msec-mikey-ecc"></xref>, expired). In the context of
      LLNs application and subject to IPR considerations, related AMIKEY
      requirements may be developed.</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="IANA" title="IANA Considerations">
      <t>This document defines several new name spaces associated with the
      AMIKEY payloads. This section summarizes the name spaces for which IANA
      is requested to manage the allocation of values. IANA is requested to
      record the pre-defined values defined in the given sections for each
      name space. IANA is also requested to manage the definition of
      additional values in the future. Unless explicitly stated otherwise,
      values in the range 0-240 for each name space SHOULD be approved by the
      process of IETF consensus and values in the range 241-255 are reserved
      for Private Use, according to <xref target="RFC2434"></xref>.</t>

      <t>The name spaces for the new fields identified in this document are
      requested to be managed by IANA (in bracket is the reference to the
      table with the initially registered values): <list style="symbols">
          <t>Common Header payload (6.1.) <list style="symbols">
              <t>Version</t>
            </list></t>

          <t>Next payload (6.1.b) <list style="symbols">
              <t>Key index</t>

              <t>Key source identifier</t>

              <t>Key activation time</t>
            </list></t>

          <t>Prf func (6.1.c) <list style="symbols">
              <t>AES-XCBC-PRF-128</t>
            </list></t>

          <t>CS ID map type (6.1.d) <list style="symbols">
              <t>Generic_LLN-ID</t>
            </list></t>

          <t>MAC alg (6.2.b) <list style="symbols">
              <t>AES-CBC-MAC-32</t>

              <t>AES-CBC-MAC-64</t>

              <t>AES-CBC-MAC-128</t>
            </list></t>

          <t>ID payload (6.7.a) <list style="symbols">
              <t>IPv6 Address</t>

              <t>Device MAC Address</t>
            </list></t>

          <t>Proto type (6.10) <list style="symbols">
              <t>Generic_LLN</t>
            </list></t>

          <t>Generic_LLN policy (6.10.2) <list style="symbols">
              <t>Policy parameters (6.10.2.a)</t>

              <t>G_LLN encr alg (6.10.2.b)</t>

              <t>G_LLN auth alg (6.10.2.c)</t>

              <t>G_LLN prf (6.10.2.d)</t>
            </list></t>
        </list></t>
    </section>

    <!-- Possibly a 'Contributors' section ... -->

    <section anchor="Acknowledgements" title="Acknowledgments">
      <t>The authors would like to acknowledge the review and comments from
      Rene Struik.</t>
    </section>
  </middle>

  <!--  *****BACK MATTER ***** -->

  <back>
    <!-- References split into informative and normative -->

    <!-- There are 2 ways to insert reference entries from the citation libraries:
     1. define an ENTITY at the top, and use "ampersand character"RFC2629; here (as shown)
     2. simply use a PI "less than character"?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119.xml"?> here
        (for I-Ds: include="reference.I-D.narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis.xml")

     Both are cited textually in the same manner: by using xref elements.
     If you use the PI option, xml2rfc will, by default, try to find included files in the same
     directory as the including file. You can also define the XML_LIBRARY environment variable
     with a value containing a set of directories to search.  These can be either in the local
     filing system or remote ones accessed by http (http://domain/dir/... ).-->

    <references title="Normative References">
      <!--?rfc include="http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml"?-->

      &RFC2119;

      &RFC2434;

      &RFC3830;

      &RFC4434;
    </references>

    <references title="Informative References">
      <!-- Here we use entities that we defined at the beginning. -->

      &RFC3605;

      &RFC3711;

      &RFC4107;

      &RFC4442;

      &RFC4563;

      &RFC4566;

      &RFC4650;

      &RFC4738;

      &RFC5197;

      &RFC5410;

      &RFC6043;

      &RFC6267;

      <!--      <reference anchor="SP800-38A">
        <front>
          <title>NIST Special Publication 800-38A, Recommendation for Block
          Cipher Modes of Operation</title>

          <author></author>

          <date month="Dec." year="2001" />
        </front>

        <seriesInfo name="US"
                    value="National Institute of Standards and Technology" />
      </reference> -->

      &I-D.ietf-roll-rpl;

      &I-D.ietf-roll-security-framework;

      &I-D.ietf-msec-mikey-ecc;
    </references>

    <!-- Change Log

v00 2006-03-15  EBD   Initial version

v01 2006-04-03  EBD   Moved PI location back to position 1 -
                      v3.1 of XMLmind is better with them at this location.
v02 2007-03-07  AH    removed extraneous nested_list attribute,
                      other minor corrections
v03 2007-03-09  EBD   Added comments on null IANA sections and fixed heading capitalization.
                      Modified comments around figure to reflect non-implementation of
                      figure indent control.  Put in reference using anchor="DOMINATION".
                      Fixed up the date specification comments to reflect current truth.
v04 2007-03-09 AH     Major changes: shortened discussion of PIs,
                      added discussion of rfc include.
v05 2007-03-10 EBD    Added preamble to C program example to tell about ABNF and alternative 
                      images. Removed meta-characters from comments (causes problems).  -->
  </back>
</rfc>
<!-- Keep this comment at the end of the file
Local variables:
mode: xml
sgml-omittag:nil
sgml-shorttag:nil
sgml-namecase-general:nil
sgml-general-insert-case:lower
sgml-minimize-attributes:nil
sgml-always-quote-attributes:t
sgml-indent-step:2
sgml-indent-data:t
sgml-parent-document:nil
sgml-exposed-tags:nil
sgml-local-catalogs:nil
sgml-local-ecat-files:nil
End:
-->

