diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc4909.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc4909.txt | 395 |
1 files changed, 395 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc4909.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc4909.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..0ff0316 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc4909.txt @@ -0,0 +1,395 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group L. Dondeti, Ed. +Request for Comments: 4909 QUALCOMM, Inc. +Category: Informational D. Castleford + France Telecom + F. Hartung + Ericsson Research + June 2007 + + + Multimedia Internet KEYing (MIKEY) General Extension Payload + for Open Mobile Alliance BCAST LTKM/STKM Transport + +Status of This Memo + + This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does + not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this + memo is unlimited. + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). + +Abstract + + This document specifies a new Multimedia Internet KEYing (MIKEY) + General Extension payload (RFC 3830) to transport the short-term key + message (STKM) and long-term key message (LTKM) payloads defined in + the Open Mobile Alliance's (OMA) Browser and Content (BAC) Broadcast + (BCAST) group's Service and Content protection specification. + +Table of Contents + + 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 + 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 + 3. MIKEY General Extension for OMA BCAST Usage . . . . . . . . . . 3 + 4. Interoperability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 + 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + + + + + + + + + +Dondeti, et al. Informational [Page 1] + +RFC 4909 OMA BCAST MIKEY General Extension June 2007 + + +1. Introduction + + The Multimedia Internet Keying (MIKEY) protocol specification [1] + defines a General Extension payload to allow possible extensions to + MIKEY without having to allocate a new payload type. The General + Extension payload can be used in any MIKEY message and is part of the + authenticated/signed data part. There is an 8-bit type field in that + payload. The type code assignment is IANA-managed, and RFC 3830 + requires IETF consensus for assignments from the public range of + 0-240. + + The Open Mobile Alliance's (OMA) Browser and Content (BAC) Broadcast + (BCAST) group's Service and Content Protection specification [2] + specifies the use of a short-term key message (STKM) and a long-term + key message (LTKM) that carry attributes related to Service and + Content protection. Note that any keys associated with the + attributes are part of the MIKEY KEMAC payload. This document + specifies the use of the General Extension payload of MIKEY to carry + the LTKMs or STKMs. + + RFC 3830 [1], the MIKEY General Extension payload defined in [3], and + the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP)'s Multimedia Broadcast/ + Multicast Service (MBMS) document [4] specify the transport of MIKEY + messages via unicast or broadcast and the OMA specifications use + either for transport of MIKEY messages. + +2. Terminology + + 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 [5]. + + OMA BCAST STKM/LTKM MIKEY General Extension: We refer to the General + Extension type -- 5 -- as the OMA BCAST STKM/LTKM MIKEY General + Extension . + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Dondeti, et al. Informational [Page 2] + +RFC 4909 OMA BCAST MIKEY General Extension June 2007 + + +3. MIKEY General Extension for OMA BCAST Usage + + 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 ! Type ! Length ! + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + ! OMA BCAST S/LTKM Subtype (variable length) ~ + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Figure 1: OMA BCAST MIKEY General Extension + + Section 6.1 of RFC 3830 specifies the first three fields of the + General Extension Payload and defines a variable length Data field. + This document specifies the use of Type 5 for OMA BCAST Service and + Content Protection using the Smartcard Profile. The contents of the + variable length data field are defined below. + + Subtype: 8 bits. This field indicates the type of the OMA BCAST + payload. In this specification, only two values are specified: + LTKM (1), and STKM (2). + + Subtype Specific Data: Variable length. The contents of this field + are defined in Section 6 of the OMA BCAST Service and Content + Protection specification [2]. + + + 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 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + ! Subtype ! Subtype specific data (variable length) ~ + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Figure 2: STKM/LTKM Subtype Payload + +4. Interoperability Considerations + + This document specifies the use of MIKEY General Extension Payload + Type 5 and a couple of subtype values (1 and 2), one each for OMA + BCAST Service and Content protection's STKM and LTKM payloads. + Interoperability considerations span several standards bodies, with + OMA BCAST 1.0 enabler compliance being the key aspect; as such, it is + up to the OMA test planning to verify the interoperability and + compliance of OMA BCAST 1.0 implementations. This payload type + assignment does not change MIKEY beyond RFC 3830 [1] and RFC 4563 + [3]. + + + + + +Dondeti, et al. Informational [Page 3] + +RFC 4909 OMA BCAST MIKEY General Extension June 2007 + + +5. Security Considerations + + According to RFC 3830, the general extension payload can be used in + any MIKEY message and is part of the authenticated/signed data part. + The parameters proposed to be included in the OMA BCAST MIKEY General + Extension payload (listed in Section 3) need only to be integrity + protected, which is already allowed by the MIKEY specification. The + OMA BCAST MIKEY General Extension Payload SHALL be integrity + protected. Furthermore, keys or any parameters that require + confidentiality MUST NOT be included in the General Extension + Payload. If keys or other confidential data are to be transported + via the General Extension Payload, such data MUST be encrypted and + encapsulated independently. Finally, note that MIKEY already + provides replay protection and that protection covers the General + Extension Payload also. + +6. IANA Considerations + + IANA has allocated a new General Extension Type from the "General + Extensions payload name spaces" in the IANA registry at + http://www.iana.org/assignments/mikey-payloads for use by OMA BCAST. + Furthermore, IANA maintains a list of corresponding subtypes (0-255) + as follows: + + 0 ... Reserved + + 1 ... LTKM + + 2 ... STKM + + 3 ... 191 (maintained by IANA and assigned by IETF Review [6]) + + 192 ... 255 (Private use) + +7. Acknowledgments + + Many thanks to Jari Arkko, Piron Laurent, and Steffen Fries for their + reviews and suggestions for improvement. + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Dondeti, et al. Informational [Page 4] + +RFC 4909 OMA BCAST MIKEY General Extension June 2007 + + +8. References + +8.1. Normative References + + [1] Arkko, J., Carrara, E., Lindholm, F., Naslund, M., and K. + Norrman, "MIKEY: Multimedia Internet KEYing", RFC 3830, + August 2004. + + [2] Open Mobile Alliance, "Service and Content Protection for Mobile + Broadcast Services", OMA TS-BCAST_SvcCntProtection-V1_0- + 20070529-C, 2007, <http://www.openmobilealliance.org/ + release_program/bcast_v1_0.html>. + + [3] Carrara, E., Lehtovirta, V., and K. Norrman, "The Key ID + Information Type for the General Extension Payload in Multimedia + Internet KEYing (MIKEY)", RFC 4563, June 2006. + + [4] 3GPP, "3G Security; Security of Multimedia Broadcast/Multicast + Service (MBMS)", 3GPP TS 33.246 6.6.0, March 2006. + + [5] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement + Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. + +8.2. Informative References + + [6] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA + Considerations Section in RFCs", Work in Progress, March 2007. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Dondeti, et al. Informational [Page 5] + +RFC 4909 OMA BCAST MIKEY General Extension June 2007 + + +Authors' Addresses + + Lakshminath Dondeti (editor) + QUALCOMM, Inc. + 5775 Morehouse Dr + San Diego, CA + USA + + Phone: +1 858-845-1267 + EMail: ldondeti@qualcomm.com + + + David Castleford + France Telecom + 4, rue du Clos Courtel + 35512 Cesson Sevigne Cedex, + France + + Phone: + 33 (0)2 99 12 49 27 + EMail: david.castleford@orange-ftgroup.com + + + Frank Hartung + Ericsson Research + Ericsson Allee 1 + 52134 Herzogenrath, + Germany + + Phone: +49 2407 575389 + EMail: frank.hartung@ericsson.com + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Dondeti, et al. Informational [Page 6] + +RFC 4909 OMA BCAST MIKEY General Extension June 2007 + + +Full Copyright Statement + + Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). + + 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. + +Acknowledgement + + Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the + Internet Society. + + + + + + + +Dondeti, et al. Informational [Page 7] + |