summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc3169.txt
blob: 2b932972a3d82e85d1633db3b6791710a75ea457 (plain) (blame)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
Network Working Group                                         M. Beadles
Request for Comments: 3169                              SmartPipes, Inc.
Category: Informational                                        D. Mitton
                                                         Nortel Networks
                                                          September 2001


        Criteria for Evaluating Network Access Server Protocols

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 Internet Society (2001).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

   This document defines requirements for protocols used by Network
   Access Servers (NAS).

1.  Requirements language

   In this document, the key words "MAY", "MUST, "MUST NOT", "optional",
   "recommended", "SHOULD", and "SHOULD NOT", are to be interpreted as
   described in [KEYWORDS].

2.  Introduction

   This document defines requirements for protocols used by Network
   Access Servers (NAS).  Protocols used by NAS's may be divided into
   four spaces:  Access protocols, Network protocols, AAA protocols, and
   Device Management protocols.  The primary focus of this document is
   on AAA protocols.

   The reference model of a NAS used by this document, and the analysis
   of the functions of a NAS which led to the development of these
   requirements, may be found in [NAS-MODEL].

3.  Access Protocol Requirements

   There are three basic types of access protocols used by NAS's.  First
   are the traditional telephony-based access protocols, which interface
   to the NAS via a modem or terminal adapter or similar device.  These
   protocols typically support asynchronous or synchronous PPP [PPP]



Beadles & Mitton             Informational                      [Page 1]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


   carried over a telephony protocol.  Second are broadband pseudo-
   telephony access protocols, which are carried over xDSL or cable
   modems, for example.  These protocols typically support an
   encapsulation method such as PPP over Ethernet [PPPOE].  Finally are
   the virtual access protocols used by NAS's that terminate tunnels.
   One example of this type of protocol is L2TP [L2TP].

   It is a central assumption of the NAS model used here that a NAS
   accepts multiple point-to-point links via one of the above access
   protocols.  Therefore, at a minimum, any NAS access protocol MUST be
   able to carry PPP.  The exception to this requirement is for NAS's
   that support legacy text login methods such as telnet [TELNET],
   rlogin, or LAT.  Only these access protocols are exempt from the
   requirement to support PPP.

4.  Network Protocol Requirements

   The network protocols supported by a NAS depend entirely on the kind
   of network to which a NAS is providing access.  This document does
   not impose any additional requirements on network protocols beyond
   the protocol specifications themselves.  For example, if a NAS that
   serves a routed network includes internet routing functionality, then
   that NAS must adhere to [ROUTING-REQUIREMENTS], but there are no
   additional protocol requirements imposed by virtue of the device
   being a NAS.

5.  AAA Protocol Requirements

5.1.  General protocol characteristics

   There are certain general characteristics that any AAA protocol used
   by NAS's must meet.  Note that the transport requirements for
   authentication/authorization are not necessarily the same as those
   for accounting/auditing.  An AAA protocol suite MAY use the same
   transport and protocol for both functions, but this is not strictly
   required.

5.1.1.  Transport requirements

5.1.1.1.  Transport independence

   The design of the AAA protocol MUST be transport independent.
   Existing infrastructures use UDP-based protocols [RADIUS], gateways
   to new protocols must be practical to encourage migration.  The
   design MUST comply with congestion control recommendations in RFC
   2914 [CONGEST].





Beadles & Mitton             Informational                      [Page 2]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


5.1.1.2.  Scalability

   Very large scale NAS's that serve up to thousands of simultaneous
   sessions are now being deployed.  And a single server system may
   service a large number of ports.  This means that, in the extreme,
   there may be an almost constant exchange of many small packets
   between the NASes and the AAA server.  An AAA protocol transport
   SHOULD support being optimized for a long-term exchange of small
   packets in a stream between a pair of hosts.

   The protocol MUST be designed to support a large number of ports,
   clients, and concurrent sessions.  Examples of poor design would
   include message identifiers which values are so small that queues and
   reception windows wrap under load, unique session identifier ranges
   that are so small that they wrap within the lifetime of potential
   long sessions, counter values that cannot accommodate reasonable
   current and future bandwidth usage, and computational processes with
   high overhead that must be performed frequently.

5.1.1.3.  Support for Multiple AAA Servers and Failure Recovery

   In order to operationally support large loads, load balancing and
   fail-over to multiple AAA servers will be required.  The AAA protocol
   MUST provide for NAS's to balance individual AAA requests between two
   or more AAA servers.  The load balancing mechanism SHOULD be built in
   to the AAA protocol itself.

   The AAA protocol MUST be able to detect a failure of the transport
   protocol to deliver a message or messages within a known and
   controllable time period, so it can engage retransmission or server
   fail-over processes.  The reliability and robustness of
   authentication requests MUST be predictable and configurable.

   The AAA protocol design MUST NOT introduce a single point of failure
   during the AAA process.  The AAA protocol MUST allow any sessions
   between a NAS and a given AAA server to fail-over to a secondary
   server without loss of state information.  This fail-over mechanism
   SHOULD be built in to the AAA protocol itself.

5.1.1.4.  Support for Multiple Administrative Domains

   NAS's operated by one authority provide network access services for
   clients operated by another authority, to network destinations
   operated by yet another authority.  This type of arrangement is of
   growing importance; for example, dial roaming is now a nearly
   ubiquitous service.  Therefore, the AAA protocol MUST support AAA





Beadles & Mitton             Informational                      [Page 3]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


   services that travel between multiple domains of authority.  The AAA
   protocol MUST NOT use a model that assumes a single domain of
   authority.

   The AAA protocol MUST NOT dictate particular business models for the
   relationship between the administrative domains.  The AAA protocol
   MUST support proxy, and in addition SHOULD support other multi-domain
   relationships such as brokering and referral.

   The AAA protocol MUST also meet the protocol requirements specified
   in [ROAMING-REQUIREMENTS].

5.1.2.  Attribute-Value Protocol Model

   Years of operational experience with AAA protocols and NAS's has
   proven that the Attribute-Value protocol model is an optimal
   representation of AAA data.  The protocol SHOULD use an Attribute-
   Value representation for AAA data.  This document will assume such a
   model.  Even if the AAA protocol does not use this as an on-the-wire
   data representation, Attribute-Value can serve as abstraction for
   discussing AAA information.

   Experience has also shown that attribute space tends to run out
   quickly.  In order to provide room for expansion in the attribute
   space, the AAA protocol MUST support a minimum of 64K Attributes (16
   bits), each with a minimum length of 64K (16 bits).

5.1.2.1.  Attribute Data Types

   The AAA protocol MUST support simple attribute data types, including
   integer, enumeration, text string, IP address, and date/time.  The
   AAA protocol MUST also provide some support for complex structured
   data types.  Wherever IP addresses are carried within the AAA
   protocol, the protocol MUST support both IPv4 and IPv6 [IPV6]
   addresses.  Wherever text information is carried within the AAA
   protocol, the protocol MUST comply with the IETF Policy on Character
   Sets and Languages [RFC 2277].

5.1.2.2.  Minimum Set of Attributes

   At a minimum, the AAA protocol MUST support, or be easily extended to
   support, the set of attributes supported by RADIUS [RADIUS] and
   RADIUS Accounting [RADIUS-ACCOUNTING].  If the base AAA protocol does
   not support this complete set of attributes, then an extension to
   that protocol MUST be defined which supports this set.






Beadles & Mitton             Informational                      [Page 4]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


5.1.2.3.  Attribute Extensibility

   NAS and AAA development is always progressing.  In order to prevent
   the AAA protocol from being a limiting factor in NAS and AAA Server
   development, the AAA protocol MUST provide a built-in extensibility
   mechanism, which MUST include a means for adding new standard
   attribute extensions.  This MUST include a method for registering or
   requesting extensions through IANA, so that long-term working group
   involvement is not required to create new attribute types.  Ideally,
   the AAA protocol SHOULD separate specification of the transport from
   specification of the attributes.

   The AAA protocol MUST include a means for individual vendors to add
   value through vendor-specific attributes and SHOULD include support
   for vendor-specific data types.

5.1.3.  Security Requirements

5.1.3.1.  Mutual Authentication

   It is poor security practice for a NAS to communicate with an AAA
   server that is not trusted, and vice versa.  The AAA protocol MUST
   provide mutual authentication between AAA server and NAS.

5.1.3.2.  Shared Secrets

   At a minimum, the AAA protocol SHOULD support use of a secret shared
   pairwise between each NAS and AAA server to mutually verify identity.
   This is intended for small-scale deployments.  The protocol MAY
   provide stronger mutual security techniques.

5.1.3.3.  Public Key Security

   AAA server/NAS identity verification based solely on shared secrets
   can be difficult to deploy properly at large scale, and it can be
   tempting for NAS operators to use a single shared secret (that rarely
   changes) across all NAS's.  This can lead to an easy compromise of
   the secret.  Therefore, the AAA protocol MUST also support mutual
   verification of identity using a public-key infrastructure that
   supports expiration and revocation of keys.

5.1.3.4.  Encryption of Attributes

   Some attributes are more operationally sensitive than others.  Also,
   in a multi-domain scenario, attributes may be inserted by servers
   from different administrative domains.  Therefore, the AAA protocol





Beadles & Mitton             Informational                      [Page 5]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


   MUST support selective encryption of attributes on an attribute-by-
   attribute basis, even within the same message.  This requirement
   applies equally to Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting
   data.

5.2.  Authentication and User Security Requirements

5.2.1.  Authentication protocol requirements

   End users who are requesting network access through a NAS will
   present various types of credentials.  It is the purpose of the AAA
   protocol to transport these credentials between the NAS and the AAA
   server.

5.2.1.1.  Bi-directional Authentication

   The AAA protocol MUST support transport of credentials from the AAA
   server to the NAS, between the User and the NAS, and between the NAS
   and the AAA server.

5.2.1.2.  Periodic Re-Authentication

   The AAA protocol MUST support re-authentication at any time during
   the course of a session, initiated from either the NAS or the AAA
   server.  This is a requirement of CHAP [CHAP].

5.2.1.3.  Multi-phase Authentication

   The AAA protocol MUST be able to support multi-phase authentication
   methods, including but not limited to support for:

      -  Text prompting from the NAS to the user

      -  A series of binary challenges and responses of arbitrary length

      -  An authentication failure reason to be transmitted from the NAS
         to the user

      -  Callback to a pre-determined phone number

5.2.1.4.  Extensible Authentication Types

   Security protocol development is going on constantly as new threats
   are identified and better cracking methods are developed.  Today's
   secure authentication methods may be proven insecure tomorrow.  The
   AAA protocol MUST provide some support for addition of new
   authentication credential types.




Beadles & Mitton             Informational                      [Page 6]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


5.2.2.  Authentication Attribute Requirements

   In addition to the minimum attribute set, the AAA protocol must
   support and define attributes that provide the following functions:

5.2.2.1.  PPP Authentication protocols

   Many authentication protocols are defined within the framework of
   PPP.  The AAA protocol MUST be able to act as an intermediary
   protocol between the authenticate and the authenticator for the
   following authentication protocols:

      -  PPP Password Authentication Protocol [PPP]

      -  PPP Challenge Handshake Authentication Protocol [CHAP]

      -  PPP Extensible Authentication Protocol [EAP]

5.2.2.2.  User Identification

   The following are common types of credentials used for user
   identification.  The AAA protocol MUST be able to carry the following
   types of identity credentials:

      -  A user name in the form of a Network Access Identifier [NAI].

      -  An Extensible Authentication Protocol [EAP] Identity Request
         Type packet.

      -  Telephony dialing information such as Dialed Number
         Identification Service (DNIS) and Caller ID.

   If a particular type of authentication credential is not needed for a
   particular user session, the AAA protocol MUST NOT require that dummy
   credentials be filled in.  That is, the AAA protocol MUST support
   authorization by identification or assertion only.

5.2.2.3.  Authentication Credentials

   The following are common types of credentials used for
   authentication.  The AAA protocol MUST be able to carry the following
   types of authenticating credentials at a minimum:

      -  A secret or password.

      -  A response to a challenge presented by the NAS to the user

      -  A one-time password



Beadles & Mitton             Informational                      [Page 7]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


      -  An X.509 digital certificate [X.509]

      -  A Kerberos v5 ticket [KERBEROS]

5.2.3.  Authentication Protocol Security Requirements

5.2.3.1.  End-to-End Hiding of Credentials

   Where passwords are used as authentication credentials, the AAA
   protocol MUST provide a secure means of hiding the password from
   intermediates in the AAA conversation.  Where challenge/response
   mechanisms are used, the AAA protocol MUST also prevent against
   replay attacks.

5.3.  Authorization, Policy, and Resource management

5.3.1.  Authorization Protocol Requirements

   In all cases, the protocol MUST specify that authorization data sent
   from the NAS to the AAA server is to be regarded as information or
   "hints", and not directives.  The AAA protocol MUST be designed so
   that the AAA server makes all final authorization decisions and does
   not depend on a certain state being expected by the NAS.

5.3.1.1.  Dynamic Authorization

   The AAA protocol MUST support dynamic re-authorization at any time
   during a user session.  This re-authorization may be initiated in
   either direction.  This dynamic re-authorization capability MUST
   include the capability to request a NAS to disconnect a user on
   demand.

5.3.1.2.  Resource Management

   Resource Management MUST be supported on demand by the NAS or AAA
   Server at any time during the course of a user session.  This would
   be the ability for the NAS to allocate and deallocate shared
   resources from a AAA server servicing multiple NASes.  These
   resources may include, but are not limited to; IP addresses,
   concurrent usage limits, port usage limits, and tunnel limits.  This
   capability should have error detection and synchronization features
   that will recover state after network and system failures.  This may
   be accomplished by session information timeouts and explicit interim
   status and disconnect messages.  There should not be any dependencies
   on the Accounting message stream, as per current practices.






Beadles & Mitton             Informational                      [Page 8]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


   This feature is primarily intended for NAS-local network resources.
   In a proxy or multi-domain environment, resource information should
   only be retained by the server doing the allocation, and perhaps it's
   backups.  Authorization resources in remote domains should use the
   dynamic authorization features to change and revoke authorization
   status.

5.3.2.  Authorization Attribute Requirements

5.3.2.1.  Authorization Attribute Requirements - Access Restrictions

   The AAA protocol serves as a primary means of gathering data used for
   making Policy decisions for network access.  Therefore, the AAA
   protocol MUST allow network operators to make policy decisions based
   on the following parameters:

      -  Time/day restrictions.  The AAA protocol MUST be able to
         provide an unambiguous time stamp, NAS time zone indication,
         and date indication to the AAA server in the Authorization
         information.

      -  Location restrictions:  The AAA protocol MUST be able to
         provide an unambiguous location code that reflects the
         geographic location of the NAS.  Note that this is not the same
         type of thing as either the dialing or dialed station.

      -  Dialing restrictions:  The AAA protocol MUST be able to provide
         accurate dialed and dialing station indications.

      -  Concurrent login limitations:  The AAA protocol MUST allow an
         AAA Server to limit concurrent logins by a particular user or
         group of users.  This mechanism does not need to be explicitly
         built into the AAA protocol, but the AAA protocol must provide
         sufficient authorization  information for an AAA server to make
         that determination through an out-of-band mechanism.

5.3.2.2.  Authorization Attribute Requirements - Authorization Profiles

   The AAA protocol is used to enforce policy at the NAS.  Essentially,
   on granting of access, a particular access profile is applied to the
   user's session.  The AAA protocol MUST at a minimum provide a means
   of applying profiles containing the following types of information:

      -  IP Address assignment: The AAA protocol MUST provide a means of
         assigning an IPv4 or IPv6 address to an incoming user.






Beadles & Mitton             Informational                      [Page 9]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


      -  Protocol Filter application:  The AAA protocol MUST provide a
         means of applying IP protocol filters to user sessions.  Two
         different methods MUST be supported.

         First, the AAA protocol MUST provide a means of selecting a
         protocol filter by reference to an identifier, with the details
         of the filter action being specified out of band.  The AAA
         protocol SHOULD define this out-of-band reference mechanism.

         Second, the AAA protocol MUST provide a means of passing a
         protocol filter by value.  This means explicit passing of
         pass/block information by address range, TCP/UDP port number,
         and IP protocol number at a minimum.

      -  Compulsory Tunneling:  The AAA protocol MUST provide a means of
         directing a NAS to build a tunnel or tunnels to a specified
         end- point.  It MUST support creation of multiple simultaneous
         tunnels in a specified order.  The protocol MUST allow, at a
         minimum, specification of the tunnel endpoints, tunneling
         protocol type, underlying tunnel media type, and tunnel
         authentication credentials (if required by the tunnel type).
         The AAA protocol MUST support at least the creation of tunnels
         using the L2TP [L2TP], ESP [ESP], and AH [AH] protocols.  The
         protocol MUST provide means of adding new tunnel types as they
         are standardized.

      -  Routing:  The AAA protocol MUST provide a means of assigning a
         particular static route to an incoming user session.

      -  Expirations/timeouts:  The AAA protocol MUST provide a means of
         communication session expiration information to a NAS.  Types
         of expirations that MUST be supported are:  total session time,
         idle time, total bytes transmitted, and total bytes received.

      -  Quality of Service:  The AAA protocol MUST provide a means for
         supplying Quality of Service parameters to the NAS for
         individual user sessions.

5.3.2.3.  Resource Management Requirements

   The AAA protocol is a means for network operators to perform
   management of network resources.  The AAA protocol MUST provide a
   means of collecting resource state information, and controlling
   resource allocation for the following types of network resources.

      -  Network bandwidth usage per session, including multilink
         sessions.




Beadles & Mitton             Informational                     [Page 10]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


      -  Access port usage, including concurrent usage and usage pools.

      -  Connect time.

      -  IP Addresses and pools.

      -  Compulsory tunnel limits.

5.3.3.  Authorization Protocol Security Requirements

5.3.3.1.  Security of Compulsory Tunnel Credentials

   When an AAA protocol passes credentials that will be used to
   authenticate compulsory tunnels, the AAA protocol MUST provide a
   means of securing the credentials from end-to-end of the AAA
   conversation.  The AAA protocol MUST also provide protection against
   replay attacks in this situation.

5.4.  Accounting and Auditing Requirements

5.4.1.  Accounting Protocol Requirements

5.4.1.1.  Guaranteed Delivery

   The accounting and auditing functions of the AAA protocol are used
   for network planning, resource management, policy decisions, and
   other functions that require accurate knowledge of the state of the
   NAS.  NAS operators need to be able to engineer their network usage
   measurement systems to a predictable level of accuracy.  Therefore,
   an AAA protocol MUST provide a means of guaranteed delivery of
   accounting information between the NAS and the AAA Server(s).

5.4.1.2.  Real Time Accounting

   NAS operators often require a real time view onto the status of
   sessions served by a NAS.  Therefore, the AAA protocol MUST support
   real-time delivery of accounting and auditing information.  In this
   context, real time is defined as accounting information delivery
   beginning within one second of the triggering event.

5.4.1.3.  Batch Accounting

   The AAA protocol SHOULD also support delivery of stored accounting
   and auditing information in batches (non-real time).







Beadles & Mitton             Informational                     [Page 11]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


5.4.1.4.  Accounting Time Stamps

   There may be delays associated with the delivery of accounting
   information.  The NAS operator will desire to know the time an event
   actually occurred, rather than simply the time when notification of
   the event was received.  Therefore, the AAA protocol MUST carry an
   unambiguous time stamp associated with each accounting event.  This
   time stamp MUST be unambiguous with regard to time zone.  Note that
   this assumes that the NAS has access to a reliable time source.

5.4.1.5.  Accounting Events

   At a minimum, the AAA protocol MUST support delivery of accounting
   information triggered by the following events:

      -  Start of a user session

      -  End of a user session

      -  Expiration of a predetermined repeating time interval during a
         user session.  The AAA protocol MUST provide a means for the
         AAA server to request that a NAS use a certain interval
         accounting time.

      -  Dynamic re-authorization during a user session (e.g., new
         resources being delivered to the user)

      -  Dynamic re-authentication during a user session

5.4.1.6.  On-Demand Accounting

   NAS operators need to maintain an accurate view onto the status of
   sessions served by a NAS, even through failure of an AAA server.
   Therefore, the AAA protocol MUST support a means of requesting
   current session state and accounting from the NAS on demand.

5.4.2.  Accounting Attribute Requirements

   At a minimum, the AAA protocol MUST support delivery of the following
   types of accounting/auditing data:

      -  All parameters used to authenticate a session.

      -  Details of the authorization profile that was applied to the
         session.

      -  The duration of the session.




Beadles & Mitton             Informational                     [Page 12]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


      -  The cumulative number of bytes sent by the user during the
         session.

      -  The cumulative number of bytes received by the user during the
         session.

      -  The cumulative number of packets sent by the user during the
         session.

      -  The cumulative number of packets received by the user during
         the session.

      -  Details of the access protocol used during the session (port
         type, connect speeds, etc.)

5.4.3.  Accounting Protocol Security Requirements

5.4.3.1.  Integrity and Confidentiality

   Note that accounting and auditing data are operationally sensitive
   information.  The AAA protocol MUST provide a means to assure end-
   to-end integrity of this data.  The AAA protocol SHOULD provide a
   means of assuring the end-to-end confidentiality of this data.

5.4.3.2.  Auditibility

   Network operators use accounting data for network planning, resource
   management, and other business-critical functions that require
   confidence in the correctness of this data.  The AAA protocol SHOULD
   provide a mechanism to ensure that the source of accounting data
   cannot easily repudiate this data after transmission.

6.  Device Management Protocols

   This document does not specify any requirements for device management
   protocols.

7.  Acknowledgments

   Many of the requirements in this document first took form in Glen
   Zorn's, "Yet Another Authentication Protocol (YAAP)" document, for
   which grateful acknowledgment is made.

8.  Security Considerations

   See above for security requirements for the NAS AAA protocol.





Beadles & Mitton             Informational                     [Page 13]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


   Where an AAA architecture spans multiple domains of authority, AAA
   information may need to cross trust boundaries.  In this situation, a
   NAS might operate as a shared device that services multiple
   administrative domains.  Network operators are advised take this into
   consideration when deploying NAS's and AAA Servers.

9.  IANA Considerations

   This document does not directly specify any IANA considerations.
   However, the following recommendations are made:

   Future development and extension of an AAA protocol will be made much
   easier if new attributes and values can be requested or registered
   directly through IANA, rather than through an IETF Standardization
   process.

   The AAA protocol might use enumerated values for some attributes,
   which enumerate already-defined IANA types (such as protocol number).
   In these cases, the AAA protocol SHOULD use the IANA assigned numbers
   as the enumerated values.

10.  References

   [AH]                    Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "IP Authentication
                           Header (AH)", RFC 2402, November 1998.

   [CHAP]                  Simpson, J.,  "PPP Challenge Handshake
                           Authentication Protocol (CHAP)", RFC 1994,
                           August 1996.

   [CONGEST]               Floyd, S., "Congestion Control Principles",
                           RFC 2914, Sept. 2000.

   [EAP]                   Blunk, L. and J. Vollbrecht, "PPP Extensible
                           Authentication Protocol (EAP)", RFC 2284,
                           March 1998.

   [ESP]                   Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "IP Encapsulating
                           Security Payload (ESP)", RFC 2406, November
                           1998.

   [KEYWORDS]              Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to
                           Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC
                           2119, March 1997.

   [KERBEROS]              Kohl, J. and C. Neuman, "The Kerberos Network
                           Authentication Service (V5)", RFC 1510,
                           September 1993.



Beadles & Mitton             Informational                     [Page 14]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


   [IPV6]                  Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet
                           Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification",
                           RFC 2460, December 1998.

   [L2TP]                  Townsley, W., Valencia, A., Rubens, A., Pall,
                           G., Zorn, G. and B. Plater, "Layer Two
                           Tunneling Protocol (L2TP)", RFC 2661, August
                           1999.

   [NAI]                   Aboba, B. and M. Beadles, "The Network Access
                           Identifier", RFC 2486, January 1999.

   [NAS-MODEL]             Mitton, D. and M. Beadles, "Network Access
                           Server Requirements Next Generation
                           (NASREQNG) NAS Model", RFC 2881, July 2000.

   [NAS-EXT]               Mitton, D., "Network Access Servers
                           Requirements: Extended RADIUS Practices", RFC
                           2882, July 2000.

   [PPP]                   Simpson, W., "The Point-to-Point Protocol
                           (PPP)", STD 51, RFC 1661, July 1994.

   [PPPOE]                 Mamakos, L., Lidl, K., Evarts, J., Carrel,
                           D., Simone, D. and R. Wheeler, "A Method for
                           Transmitting PPP Over Ethernet (PPPoE)", RFC
                           2516, February 1999.

   [ROUTING-REQUIREMENTS]  Baker, F., "Requirements for IP Version 4
                           Routers", RFC 1812, June 1995.

   [TELNET]                Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "Telnet Protocol
                           Specification", STD 8, RFC 854, May 1983.

   [RFC 2277]              Alvestrand, H., "IETF Policy on Character
                           Sets and Languages", BCP 18, RFC 2277,
                           January 1998.

   [X.509]                 ITU-T Recommendation X.509 (1997 E):
                           Information Technology - Open Systems
                           Interconnection - The Directory:
                           Authentication Framework, June 1997.

   [RADIUS]                Rigney, C., Rubens. A., Simpson, W. and S.
                           Willens, "Remote Authentication Dial In User
                           Service (RADIUS)", RFC 2138, April 1997.





Beadles & Mitton             Informational                     [Page 15]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


   [RADIUS-ACCOUNTING]     Rigney, C., "RADIUS Accounting", RFC 2139,
                           April 1997.

   [ROAMING-REQUIREMENTS]  Aboba, B. and G. Zorn, "Criteria for
                           Evaluating Roaming Protocols", RFC 2477,
                           January 1999.

11.  Authors' Addresses

   Mark Anthony Beadles
   SmartPipes, Inc.
   565 Metro Place South Suite 300
   Dublin, OH 43017

   Phone: 614-923-6200


   David Mitton
   Nortel Networks
   880 Technology Park Drive
   Billerica, MA 01821

   Phone: 978-288-4570
   EMail: dmitton@nortelnetworks.com



























Beadles & Mitton             Informational                     [Page 16]
^L
RFC 3169         Criteria for Evaluating NAS Protocols    September 2001


12.  Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001).  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.

   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.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.



















Beadles & Mitton             Informational                     [Page 17]
^L