Internet Draft James M. Polk
Issued: March 10, 2000 Cisco Systems
Expiration: September 10, 2000 Haitao Tang
Nokia
Spatial Location Protocol Location Server
Authentication
<draft-polk-slp-loc-auth-server-00.txt>
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance
with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engi-
neering 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.
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 [RFC-2119].
Polk draft-polk-slp-loc-auth-server-00.txt Page 1
Internet Draft Spatial Location Server Auth March 2000
Abstract
This document describes the early considerations for a Spatial
Location Server and issues that will need to be addressed when
an IP Device that has determined its location (TBD in another
document effort) requests, or is requested, to provide that
information to a Spatial Location Server (SLS).
Table of Contents
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Table of Contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.0 Mechanisms of the Spatial Location Server. . . . . . . . 2
3.0 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.0 Security Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5.0 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6.0 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7.0 Author Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.0 Introduction
This document describes the early considerations for a Spatial
Location Server and issues that will need to be addressed when
an IP Device that has determined its location (TBD in another
document effort) and requests, or is requested, to provide that
information to a Spatial Location Server (SLS).
2.0 Mechanisms of the Spatial Location Server
First and foremost, each Spatial Location Server (SLS) will
MUST determine its own location. This location discovery
and determination will be performed in a manner outlined/
stipulated in the definitions of the Spatial Location Protocol
(SLP) itself; which is covered by another I-D within this BOF.
It appears likely a need for an Authentication Server, similar
to a Security Server, that should be within the Network Domain
of a SLP Location Server in order to validate its existence
within that Domain. From this Authentication Server Concept, a
Hierarchy can be obtained for authenticating to the next higher
authority in a similar manner as a Certificate Authority Server
scenario. This communications with either hierarchically
parallel SLS servers for the purposes of back-up/fail-over, or
up and down the overall hierarchy should be done utilizing
IPsec [1]. Whether this is done with ESP [2] or AH [3] is up
to the BOF to determine. Additionally, investigation should be
Polk draft-polk-slp-loc-auth-server-00.txt Page 2
Internet Draft Spatial Location Server Auth March 2000
made into GLP [4] from the MMUSIC WG for similarities or
possible slight modifications to that protocol which could
allow its application here for this purpose; although other
solutions/protocols providing this desired result should be
mentioned to the authors of this document (who happen to be the
chairs of this BOF) for investigation within the BOF.
Once a domain has an SLS authenticated by its higher authority,
it can establish boundaries either dynamically (not yet covered
by this document or other I-D/RFC) or via manual configuration
from its domain administrator. These boundaries will be repre-
sented by the BOF/WG agreed upon coordinate Legend for SLP.
The following is an early potential list, in no particular order
and easily a subset of the possibilities, of coordinate mecha-
nisms/values, where reference accuracy and valid time must
associated:
* X, Y, Z
* Long., Lat., Alt.
* Planet, Country, State/Province, City/town, street,
building, zip code, floor, quadrant of floor, office/
cube number
* To geographic area like a floor, part of a floor, a
building a city ()
Known additional or replacement identification information could
include:
* Relation to directly attached L2 Switch/Router
* Relative or absolute location to any of the above items
* Perhaps a remote site relative to a corporate site
* Residence or company name
As a new IP device comes on-line within a domain that either
has, or mandates, SLP, it will (likely) determine if an SLS
exists via DNS query. A 'yet-to-be-decided' method of authenti-
cation of the Server from the new IP device's point of view
should be required. If successful, it should then either trans-
mit or reply, respectively, its location based on the performed
function of SLP to that SLS server. Again, with a 'yet-to-be-
decided' method of authentication should be performed, this
time from the server's point of view that this is a via IP
device for this domain.
Polk draft-polk-slp-loc-auth-server-00.txt Page 3
Internet Draft Spatial Location Server Auth March 2000
3.0 IANA Considerations
The authors don't believe there are any within this document at
this time.
4.0 Security Considerations
There is a possibility of misuse of this protocol. This truly
has the potential of a "Big-Brother" scenario. If a malicious
attack occurred to the SLS, all IP devices within that domain
would have their (as best as SLP can deduce) location discovered
for whatever publication or distribution that individual wanted.
Highly sensitive areas such as research facilities and govern-
ment agencies should have a paranoid security view of this
protocol's misuse. Yet, in many ways, the benefits of appli-
catons such as e911 could outweigh the potential dangers of
its possible misuse. Though, methods to prevent or avoid the
possible misuses should be considered. The privacy issues and
their related usability issues should also be investigated.
The authors think these are a part of the crucial requirements
for the spatial location effort.
5.0 References:
[1] RFC2401 "Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol"
S. Kent and Ran Atkinson, November 1998
[2] RFC2406 "IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)" S. Kent
and Ran Atkinson, November 1998
[3] RFC2402 "IP Authentication Header (AH)" S. Kent and Ran
Atkinson, November 1998
[4] Internet Draft "draft-ietf-iptel-gwloc-framework-06.txt"
J.Rosenberg, H.Schulzrinne November 29, 1999 "work-in-
progress"
6.0 Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Rohan Mahy who made comments
and suggestions contributing to this document.
Polk draft-polk-slp-loc-auth-server-00.txt Page 4
Internet Draft Spatial Location Server Auth March 2000
7.0 Author Information
James M. Polk
Cisco Systems
18581 N. Dallas Parkway, Suite 100
Dallas, TX 75287, US
jmpolk@cisco.com
Haitao Tang
Nokia Research Center
Itamerenkatu 11-13
FIN-00180, Helsinki, Finland
haitao.tang@nokia.com
"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 organi-
zations, 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.
This document and the information contained herein is provided
on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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."
The Expiration date for this Internet Draft is:
September 10, 2000
Polk draft-polk-slp-loc-auth-server-00.txt Page 5
Internet Draft Spatial Location Server Auth March 2000