Internet Engineering Task Force R. Braden INTERNET DRAFT ISI File: draft-ietf-rsvp-fix-iana-00.txt L. Zhang Updates: 2747 UCLA EXPIRES: July 2001 January 2001 RSVP Cryptographic Authentication -- New Message Type Status of this Memo This document is an Internet Draft ans is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026. 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 Abstract This memo resolves a duplication in the assignment of RSVP Message Types, by changing the Message Types assigned by RFC 2747 to Challenge and Integrity Response messages. 1. Introduction RFC 2747 ("RSVP Cryptographic Authentication") [RFC 2747] assigns RSVP Message Type 12 to an Integrity Response message, while RFC xxxx ("RSVP Refresh Overhead Reduction Extensions") [RFCxxxx] assigns the same value to a Bundle message. This memo resolves the conflict over RSVP Message Type 12 by assigning a different value to the Message Type of the Integrity Response Message in RFC 2747. It is believed that the protocol defined by RFC xxxx entered use in the field before the RFC's publication and before the conflicting Message Type was noticed. and that it may be easier to install new software in environments that have deployed the Integrity object than in those that have deployed the refresh reduction extension. To simplify possible interoperability problems caused by this change, we also assign a new value to the Message Type of RFC 2747's Challenge message, to which the Integrity Response message is a reply. 2. Modification Message Types defined in the RSVP Integrity extension [RFC 2747] shall be changed as follows: o Challenge message has Message Type zz. o Integrity Response message has Message Type zz+1. [zz is TBD by the IANA; we suggest 25] 3. Compatibility Two communicating nodes whose Integrity implementations are conformant with this modification will interoperate, using Message Type 12 for Bundle messages and Message Types zz, zz+1 for the Integrity handshake. A non-conformant implementation of the Integrity extension will not interoperate with a conformant implementation (though two non-conformant implementations can interoperate as before). There is no possibility of an Integrity handshake succeeding accidentally due to this change, since both sides of the handshake use the new numbers or the old numbers. Furthermore, the Integrity Response message includes a 32-bit cookie that must match a cookie in the Challenge message, else the challenge will fail. Finally, a non-conformant implementation should never receive a Bundle message that it interprets as an Integrity Response message, since RFC xxxx requires that Bundle messages be sent only to a Bundle-capable node. 4. References [RFC2747] Baker, F., Lindell, R., and M. Talwar, "RSVP Cryptographic Authentication", RFC 2747, January 2000. [RFCxxxx] Berger, L., Gan, D., Swallow, G., Pan, P., Tommasi, F., and S. Molendini, "RSVP Refresh Overhead Reduction Extensions", RFCxxxx, January 2001. Security Considerations No new security considerations are introduced beyond RFC2747 itself and the compatibility issues above. Authors' Addresses Bob Braden USC Information Sciences Institute 4676 Admiralty Way Marina del Rey, CA 90292 Phone: (310) 822-1511 EMail: Braden@ISI.EDU Lixia Zhang UCLA Computer Science Department 4531G Boelter Hall Los Angeles, CA 90095-1596 USA Phone: 310-825-2695 EMail: lixia@cs.ucla.edu Full Copyright Statement "Copyright (C) The Internet Society (date). All Rights Reserved. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English. The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns."