path: root/doc/rfc/rfc5981.txt

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                         J. Manner
Request for Comments: 5981                              Aalto University
Category: Experimental                                    M. Stiemerling
ISSN: 2070-1721                                                      NEC
                                                           H. Tschofenig
                                                  Nokia Siemens Networks
                                                           R. Bless, Ed.
                                                                     KIT
                                                           February 2011


            Authorization for NSIS Signaling Layer Protocols

Abstract

   Signaling layer protocols specified within the Next Steps in
   Signaling (NSIS) framework may rely on the General Internet Signaling
   Transport (GIST) protocol to handle authorization.  Still, the
   signaling layer protocol above GIST itself may require separate
   authorization to be performed when a node receives a request for a
   certain kind of service or resources.  This document presents a
   generic model and object formats for session authorization within the
   NSIS signaling layer protocols.  The goal of session authorization is
   to allow the exchange of information between network elements in
   order to authorize the use of resources for a service and to
   coordinate actions between the signaling and transport planes.

Status of This Memo

   This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
   published for examination, experimental implementation, and
   evaluation.

   This document defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet
   community.  This document is a product of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF
   community.  It has received public review and has been approved for
   publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not
   all documents approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of
   Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5981.







Manner, et al.                Experimental                      [Page 1]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Conventions Used in This Document  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Session Authorization Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     3.1.  Session Authorization Object format  . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     3.2.  Session Authorization Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       3.2.1.  Authorizing Entity Identifier  . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       3.2.2.  Session Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       3.2.3.  Source Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       3.2.4.  Destination Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       3.2.5.  Start Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       3.2.6.  End Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       3.2.7.  NSLP Object List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       3.2.8.  Authentication Data  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   4.  Integrity of the SESSION_AUTH Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
     4.1.  Shared Symmetric Keys  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
       4.1.1.  Operational Setting Using Shared Symmetric Keys  . . . 16
     4.2.  Kerberos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
     4.3.  Public Key . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
       4.3.1.  Operational Setting for Public-Key-Based
               Authentication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
     4.4.  HMAC Signed  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
   5.  Framework  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
     5.1.  The Coupled Model  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
     5.2.  The Associated Model with One Policy Server  . . . . . . . 23
     5.3.  The Associated Model with Two Policy Servers . . . . . . . 24
     5.4.  The Non-Associated Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
   6.  Message Processing Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
     6.1.  Generation of the SESSION_AUTH by an Authorizing Entity  . 25
     6.2.  Processing within the QoS NSLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
       6.2.1.  Message Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
       6.2.2.  Message Reception  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26



Manner, et al.                Experimental                      [Page 2]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


       6.2.3.  Authorization (QNE or PDP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
       6.2.4.  Error Signaling  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
     6.3.  Processing with the NATFW NSLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
       6.3.1.  Message Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
       6.3.2.  Message Reception  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
       6.3.3.  Authorization (Router/PDP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
       6.3.4.  Error Signaling  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
     6.4.  Integrity Protection of NSLP Messages  . . . . . . . . . . 29
   7.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
   8.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
   9.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
   10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
     10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
     10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

1.  Introduction

   The Next Steps in Signaling (NSIS) framework [RFC4080] defines a
   suite of protocols for the next generation in Internet signaling.
   The design is based on a generalized transport protocol for signaling
   applications, the General Internet Signaling Transport (GIST)
   [RFC5971], and various kinds of signaling applications.  Two
   signaling applications and their NSIS Signaling Layer Protocol (NSLP)
   have been designed, a Quality of Service application (QoS NSLP)
   [RFC5974] and a NAT/firewall application (NATFW NSLP) [RFC5973].

   The basic security architecture for NSIS is based on a chain-of-trust
   model, where each GIST hop may choose the appropriate security
   protocol, taking into account the signaling application requirements.
   For instance, communication between two directly adjacent GIST peers
   may be secured via TCP/TLS.  On the one hand, this model is
   appropriate for a number of different use cases and allows the
   signaling applications to leave the handling of security to GIST.  On
   the other hand, several sessions of different signaling applications
   are then multiplexed onto the same GIST TLS connection.

   Yet, in order to allow for finer-grain per-session or per-user
   admission control, it is necessary to provide a mechanism for
   ensuring that the use of resources by a host has been properly
   authorized before allowing the signaling application to commit the
   resource request, e.g., a QoS reservation or mappings for NAT
   traversal.  In order to meet this requirement, there must be
   information in the NSLP message that may be used to verify the
   validity of the request.  This can be done by providing the host with
   a Session Authorization Object that is inserted into the message and
   verified by the respective network elements.





Manner, et al.                Experimental                      [Page 3]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   This document describes a generic NSLP-layer Session Authorization
   Object (SESSION_AUTH) used to convey authorization information for
   the request.  "Generic" in this context means that it is usable by
   all NSLPs.  The scheme is based on third-party tokens.  A trusted
   third party provides authentication tokens to clients and allows
   verification of the information by the network elements.  The
   requesting host inserts the authorization information (e.g., a policy
   object) acquired from the trusted third party into the NSLP message
   to allow verification of the network resource request.  Network
   elements verify the request and then process it based on admission
   policy (e.g., they perform a resource reservation or change bindings
   or firewall filter).  This work is based on RFC 3520 [RFC3520] and
   RFC 3521 [RFC3521].

   The default operation when using NSLP-layer session authorization is
   to add one authorization policy object.  Yet, in order to support
   end-to-end signaling and request authorization from different
   networks, a host initiating an NSLP signaling session may add more
   than one SESSION_AUTH object in the message.  The identifier of the
   authorizing entity can be used by the network elements to use the
   third party they trust to verify the request.

2.  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 BCP 14, RFC 2119
   [RFC2119].

   The term "NSLP node" (NN) is used to refer to an NSIS node running an
   NSLP protocol that can make use of the authorization object discussed
   in this document.  Currently, this node would run either the QoS NSLP
   [RFC5974] or the NAT/Firewall NSLP [RFC5973] service.

3.  Session Authorization Object

   This section presents a new NSLP-layer object called session
   authorization (SESSION_AUTH).  The SESSION_AUTH object can be used in
   the currently specified and future NSLP protocols.

   The authorization attributes follow the format and specification
   given in RFC3520 [RFC3520].









Manner, et al.                Experimental                      [Page 4]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


3.1.  Session Authorization Object format

   The SESSION_AUTH object contains a list of fields that describe the
   session, along with other attributes.  The object header follows the
   generic NSLP object header; therefore, it can be used together with
   any NSLP.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |A|B|r|r|         Type          |r|r|r|r|        Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   +                                                               +
   //         Session Authorization Attribute List                //
   +                                                               +
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+

   The value for the Type field comes from shared NSLP object type
   space.  The Length field is given in units of 32-bit words and
   measures the length of the Value component of the TLV object (i.e.,
   it does not include the standard header).

   The bits marked 'A' and 'B' are extensibility flags and are used to
   signal the desired treatment for objects whose treatment has not been
   defined in the protocol specification (i.e., whose Type field is
   unknown at the receiver).  The following four categories of object
   have been identified, and are described here for informational
   purposes only (for normative behavior, refer to the particular NSLP
   documents, e.g., [RFC5974] [RFC5973]).

      AB=00 ("Mandatory"): If the object is not understood, the entire
      message containing it MUST be rejected, and an error message sent
      back (usually of class/code "Protocol Error/Unknown object
      present").

      AB=01 ("Ignore"): If the object is not understood, it MUST be
      deleted, and the rest of the message processed as usual.

      AB=10 ("Forward"): If the object is not understood, it MUST be
      retained unchanged in any message forwarded as a result of message
      processing, but not stored locally.

      AB=11 ("Refresh"): If the object is not understood, it should be
      incorporated into the locally stored signaling application state
      for this flow/session, forwarded in any resulting message, and
      also used in any refresh or repair message which is generated
      locally.  This flag combination is not used by all NSLPs, e.g., it
      is not used in the NATFW NSLP.



Manner, et al.                Experimental                      [Page 5]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   The remaining bits marked 'r' are reserved.  The extensibility flags
   follow the definition in the GIST specification.  The SESSION_AUTH
   object defined in this specification MUST have the AB bits set to
   "10".  An NSLP Node (NN) may use the authorization information if it
   is configured to do so, but may also just skip the object.

   Type: SESSION_AUTH_OBJECT (0x016)

   Length: Variable, contains length of session authorization object
   list in units of 32-bit words.

   Session Authorization Attribute List: variable length

      The session authorization attribute list is a collection of
      objects that describes the session and provides other information
      necessary to verify resource request (e.g., a resource
      reservation, binding, or firewall filter change request).  An
      initial set of valid objects is described in Section 3.2.

3.2.  Session Authorization Attributes

   A session authorization attribute may contain a variety of
   information and has both an attribute type and sub-type.  The
   attribute itself MUST be a multiple of 4 octets in length, and any
   attributes that are not a multiple of 4 octets long MUST be padded to
   a 4-octet boundary.  All padding bytes MUST have a value of zero.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |    X-Type     |   SubType     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   //                           Value ...                         //
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+

   Length: 16 bits

      The Length field is two octets and indicates the actual length of
      the attribute (including Length, X-Type, and SubType fields) in
      number of octets.  The length does NOT include any padding of the
      value field to make the attribute's length a multiple of 4 octets.

   X-Type: 8 bits

      Session authorization attribute type (X-Type) field is one octet.
      IANA acts as a registry for X-Types as described in Section 8,
      IANA Considerations.  This specification uses the following
      X-Types:



Manner, et al.                Experimental                      [Page 6]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


      1.  AUTH_ENT_ID: The unique identifier of the entity that
          authorized the session.

      2.  SESSION_ID: The unique identifier for this session, usually
          created locally at the authorizing entity.  See also RFC 3520
          [RFC3520]; not to be confused with the SESSION-ID of GIST/
          NSIS.

      3.  SOURCE_ADDR: The address specification for the signaling
          session initiator, i.e., the source address of the signaling
          message originator.

      4.  DEST_ADDR: The address specification for the signaling session
          endpoint.

      5.  START_TIME: The starting time for the session.

      6.  END_TIME: The end time for the session.

      7.  AUTHENTICATION_DATA: The authentication data of the Session
          Authorization Object.

   SubType: 8 bits

      Session authorization attribute sub-type is one octet in length.
      The value of the SubType depends on the X-Type.

   Value: variable length

      The attribute-specific information.

3.2.1.  Authorizing Entity Identifier

   The AUTH_ENT_ID is used to identify the entity that authorized the
   initial service request and generated the Session Authorization
   Object.  The AUTH_ENT_ID may be represented in various formats, and
   the SubType is used to define the format for the ID.  The format for
   AUTH_ENT_ID is as follows:

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |    X-Type     |   SubType     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   //                        OctetString ...                      //
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+





Manner, et al.                Experimental                      [Page 7]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   Length: Length of the attribute, which MUST be > 4.

   X-Type: AUTH_ENT_ID

   SubType:

      The following sub-types for AUTH_ENT_ID are defined.  IANA acts as
      a registry for AUTH_ENT_ID SubTypes as described in Section 8,
      IANA Considerations.  Initially, the registry contains the
      following SubTypes of AUTH_ENT_ID:

      1.   IPV4_ADDRESS: IPv4 address represented in 32 bits.

      2.   IPV6_ADDRESS: IPv6 address represented in 128 bits.

      3.   FQDN: Fully Qualified Domain Name as defined in [RFC1034] as
           an ASCII string.

      4.   ASCII_DN: X.500 Distinguished name as defined in [RFC4514] as
           an ASCII string.

      5.   UNICODE_DN: X.500 Distinguished name as defined in [RFC4514]
           as a UTF-8 string.

      6.   URI: Universal Resource Identifier, as defined in [RFC3986].

      7.   KRB_PRINCIPAL: Fully Qualified Kerberos Principal name
           represented by the ASCII string of a principal, followed by
           the @ realm name as defined in [RFC4120] (e.g.,
           johndoe@nowhere).

      8.   X509_V3_CERT: The Distinguished Name of the subject of the
           certificate as defined in [RFC4514] as a UTF-8 string.

      9.   PGP_CERT: The OpenPGP certificate of the authorizing entity
           as defined as Public-Key Packet in [RFC4880].

      10.  HMAC_SIGNED: Indicates that the AUTHENTICATION_DATA attribute
           contains a self-signed HMAC signature [RFC2104] that ensures
           the integrity of the NSLP message.  The HMAC is calculated
           over all NSLP objects given in the NSLP_OBJECT_LIST attribute
           that MUST also be present.  The object specifies the hash
           algorithm that is used for calculation of the HMAC as
           Transform ID from Transform Type 3 of the IKEv2 registry
           [RFC5996].

   OctetString: Contains the authorizing entity identifier.




Manner, et al.                Experimental                      [Page 8]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


3.2.2.  Session Identifier

   SESSION_ID is a unique identifier used by the authorizing entity to
   identify the request.  It may be used for a number of purposes,
   including replay detection, or to correlate this request to a policy
   decision entry made by the authorizing entity.  For example, the
   SESSION_ID can be based on simple sequence numbers or on a standard
   NTP timestamp.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |    X-Type     |   SubType     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   //                        OctetString ...                      //
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+

   Length: Length of the attribute, which MUST be > 4.

   X-Type: SESSION_ID

   SubType:

   No sub-types for SESSION_ID are currently defined; this field MUST be
   set to zero.  The authorizing entity is the only network entity that
   needs to interpret the contents of the SESSION_ID; therefore, the
   contents and format are implementation dependent.

   OctetString: The OctetString contains the session identifier.

3.2.3.  Source Address

   SOURCE_ADDR is used to identify the source address specification of
   the authorized session.  This X-Type may be useful in some scenarios
   to make sure the resource request has been authorized for that
   particular source address and/or port.  Usually, it corresponds to
   the signaling source, e.g., the IP source address of the GIST packet,
   or flow source or flow destination address, respectively, which are
   contained in the GIST MRI (Message Routing Information) object.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |    X-Type     |   SubType     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   //                        OctetString ...                      //
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+




Manner, et al.                Experimental                      [Page 9]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   Length: Length of the attribute, which MUST be > 4.

   X-Type: SOURCE_ADDR

   SubType:

      The following sub-types for SOURCE_ADDR are defined.  IANA acts as
      a registry for SOURCE_ADDR SubTypes as described in Section 8,
      IANA Considerations.  Initially, the registry contains the
      following SubTypes for SOURCE_ADDR:

      1.  IPV4_ADDRESS: IPv4 address represented in 32 bits.

      2.  IPV6_ADDRESS: IPv6 address represented in 128 bits.

      3.  UDP_PORT_LIST: list of UDP port specifications, represented as
          16 bits per list entry.

      4.  TCP_PORT_LIST: list of TCP port specifications, represented as
          16 bits per list entry.

      5.  SPI: Security Parameter Index, represented in 32 bits.

   OctetString: The OctetString contains the source address information.

   In scenarios where a source address is required (see Section 5), at
   least one of the sub-types 1 or 2 MUST be included in every Session
   Authorization Object.  Multiple SOURCE_ADDR attributes MAY be
   included if multiple addresses have been authorized.  The source
   address of the request (e.g., a QoS NSLP RESERVE) MUST match one of
   the SOURCE_ADDR attributes contained in this Session Authorization
   Object.

   At most, one instance of sub-type 3 MAY be included in every Session
   Authorization Object.  At most, one instance of sub-type 4 MAY be
   included in every Session Authorization Object.  Inclusion of a sub-
   type 3 attribute does not prevent inclusion of a sub-type 4 attribute
   (i.e., both UDP and TCP ports may be authorized).

   If no PORT attributes are specified, then all ports are considered
   valid; otherwise, only the specified ports are authorized for use.
   Every source address and port list must be included in a separate
   SOURCE_ADDR attribute.








Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 10]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


3.2.4.  Destination Address

   DEST_ADDR is used to identify the destination address of the
   authorized session.  This X-Type may be useful in some scenarios to
   make sure the resource request has been authorized for that
   particular destination address and/or port.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |    X-Type     |   SubType     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   //                        OctetString ...                      //
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+

   Length: Length of the attribute in number of octets, which MUST be >
   4.

   X-Type: DEST_ADDR

   SubType:

      The following sub-types for DEST_ADDR are defined.  IANA acts as a
      registry for DEST_ADDR SubTypes as described in Section 8, IANA
      Considerations.  Initially, the registry contains the following
      SubTypes for DEST_ADDR:

      1.  IPV4_ADDRESS: IPv4 address represented in 32 bits.

      2.  IPV6_ADDRESS: IPv6 address represented in 128 bits.

      3.  UDP_PORT_LIST: list of UDP port specifications, represented as
          16 bits per list entry.

      4.  TCP_PORT_LIST: list of TCP port specifications, represented as
          16 bits per list entry.

      5.  SPI: Security Parameter Index, represented in 32 bits.

   OctetString: The OctetString contains the destination address
   specification.

   In scenarios where a destination address is required (see Section 5),
   at least one of the sub-types 1 or 2 MUST be included in every
   Session Authorization Object.  Multiple DEST_ADDR attributes MAY be
   included if multiple addresses have been authorized.  The destination





Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 11]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   address field of the resource reservation datagram (e.g., QoS NSLP
   Reserve) MUST match one of the DEST_ADDR attributes contained in this
   Session Authorization Object.

   At most, one instance of sub-type 3 MAY be included in every Session
   Authorization Object.  At most, one instance of sub-type 4 MAY be
   included in every Session Authorization Object.  Inclusion of a sub-
   type 3 attribute does not prevent inclusion of a sub-type 4 attribute
   (i.e., both UDP and TCP ports may be authorized).

   If no PORT attributes are specified, then all ports are considered
   valid; otherwise, only the specified ports are authorized for use.

   Every destination address and port list must be included in a
   separate DEST_ADDR attribute.

3.2.5.  Start Time

   START_TIME is used to identify the start time of the authorized
   session and can be used to prevent replay attacks.  If the
   SESSION_AUTH object is presented in a resource request, the network
   SHOULD reject the request if it is not received within a few seconds
   of the start time specified.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |    X-Type     |   SubType     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   //                        OctetString ...                      //
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+

   Length: Length of the attribute, which MUST be > 4.

   X-Type: START_TIME

   SubType:

   The following sub-type for START_TIME is defined.  IANA acts as a
   registry for START_TIME SubTypes as described in Section 8, IANA
   Considerations.  Initially, the registry contains the following
   SubType for START_TIME:

      1 NTP_TIMESTAMP: NTP Timestamp Format as defined in RFC 5905
      [RFC5905].

   OctetString: The OctetString contains the start time.




Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 12]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


3.2.6.  End Time

   END_TIME is used to identify the end time of the authorized session
   and can be used to limit the amount of time that resources are
   authorized for use (e.g., in prepaid session scenarios).

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |    X-Type     |   SubType     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   //                        OctetString ...                      //
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+

   Length: Length of the attribute, which MUST be > 4.

   X-Type: END_TIME

   SubType:

   The following sub-type for END_TIME is defined.  IANA acts as a
   registry for END_TIME SubTypes as described in Section 8, IANA
   Considerations.  Initially, the registry contains the following
   SubType for END_TIME:

      1 NTP_TIMESTAMP: NTP Timestamp Format as defined in RFC 5905
      [RFC5905].

   OctetString: The OctetString contains the end time.

3.2.7.  NSLP Object List

   The NSLP_OBJECT_LIST attribute contains a list of NSLP object types
   that are used in the keyed-hash computation whose result is given in
   the AUTHENTICATION_DATA attribute.  This allows for an integrity
   protection of NSLP PDUs.  If an NSLP_OBJECT_LIST attribute has been
   included in the SESSION_AUTH object, an AUTHENTICATION_DATA attribute
   MUST also be present.

   The creator of this attribute lists every NSLP object type whose NSLP
   PDU object was included in the computation of the hash.  The hash
   computation has to follow the order of the NSLP object types as
   specified by the list.  The receiver can verify the integrity of the
   NSLP PDU by computing a hash over all NSLP objects that are listed in
   this attribute (in the given order), including all the attributes of
   the authorization object.  Since all NSLP object types are unique
   over all different NSLPs, this will work for any NSLP.




Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 13]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   Basic NSIS Transport Layer Protocol (NTLP) / NSLP objects like the
   session ID, the NSLPID, and the MRI MUST be always included in the
   HMAC.  Since they are not carried within the NSLP itself, but only
   within GIST, they have to be provided for HMAC calculation, e.g.,
   they can be delivered via the GIST API.  They MUST be normalized to
   their network representation from [RFC5971] again before calculating
   the hash.  These values MUST be hashed first (in the order session
   ID, NSLPID, MRI), before any other NSLP object values that are
   included in the hash computation.

   A summary of the NSLP_OBJECT_LIST attribute format is described
   below.

    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
   +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
   | Length                        | NSLP_OBJ_LIST |     zero      |
   +---------------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+
   | # of signed NSLP objects = n  |  rsv  |  NSLP object type (1) |
   +-------+-------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+
   |  rsv  | NSLP object type (2)  |             .....            //
   +-------+-------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
   |  rsv  | NSLP object type (n)  |     (padding if required)     |
   +--------------+----------------+---------------+---------------+

   Length: Length of the attribute, which MUST be > 4.

   X-Type: NSLP_OBJECT_LIST

   SubType: No sub-types for NSLP_OBJECT_LIST are currently defined.
   This field MUST be set to 0 and ignored upon reception.

   # of signed NSLP objects: The number n of NSLP object types that
   follow. n=0 is allowed; in that case, only a padding field is
   contained.

   rsv: reserved bits; MUST be set to 0 and ignored upon reception.

   NSLP object type: the NSLP 12-bit object type identifier of the
   object that was included in the hash calculation.  The NSLP object
   type values comprise only 12 bits, so four bits per type value are
   currently not used within the list.  Depending on the number of
   signed objects, a corresponding padding word of 16 bits must be
   supplied.







Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 14]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   padding: padding MUST be added if the number of NSLP objects is even
   and MUST NOT be added if the number of NSLP objects is odd.  If
   padding has to be applied, the padding field MUST be 16 bits set to
   0, and its contents MUST be ignored upon reception.

3.2.8.  Authentication Data

   The AUTHENTICATION_DATA attribute contains the authentication data of
   the SESSION_AUTH object and signs all the data in the object up to
   the AUTHENTICATION_DATA.  If the AUTHENTICATION_DATA attribute has
   been included in the SESSION_AUTH object, it MUST be the last
   attribute in the list.  The algorithm used to compute the
   authentication data depends on the AUTH_ENT_ID SubType field.  See
   Section 4 entitled "Integrity of the SESSION_AUTH Object".

   A summary of the AUTHENTICATION_DATA attribute format is described
   below.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |    X-Type     |   SubType     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   //                        OctetString ...                      //
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+

   Length: Length of the attribute, which MUST be > 4.

   X-Type: AUTHENTICATION_DATA

   SubType: No sub-types for AUTHENTICATION_DATA are currently defined.
   This field MUST be set to 0 and ignored upon reception.

   OctetString: The OctetString contains the authentication data of the
   SESSION_AUTH.

4.  Integrity of the SESSION_AUTH Object

   This section describes how to ensure that the integrity of the
   SESSION_AUTH object is preserved.

4.1.  Shared Symmetric Keys

   In shared symmetric key environments, the AUTH_ENT_ID MUST be of sub-
   types: IPV4_ADDRESS, IPV6_ADDRESS, FQDN, ASCII_DN, UNICODE_DN, or
   URI.  An example SESSION_AUTH object is shown below.





Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 15]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |1|0|0|0| Type = SESSION_AUTH   |0|0|0|0|    Object Length      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |   AUTH_ENT_ID | IPV4_ADDRESS  |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   OctetString ...   (The authorizing entity's Identifier)     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |   AUTH_DATA   |     zero      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                            Key-ID                             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   OctetString ...   (Authentication data)                     |
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+

                Figure 1: Example of a SESSION_AUTH Object

4.1.1.  Operational Setting Using Shared Symmetric Keys

   This assumes both the Authorizing Entity and the network router/PDP
   (Policy Decision Point) are provisioned with shared symmetric keys,
   policies detailing which algorithm to be used for computing the
   authentication data, and the expected length of the authentication
   data for that particular algorithm.

   Key maintenance is outside the scope of this document, but
   SESSION_AUTH implementations MUST at least provide the ability to
   manually configure keys and their parameters.  The key used to
   produce the authentication data is identified by the AUTH_ENT_ID
   field.  Since multiple keys may be configured for a particular
   AUTH_ENT_ID value, the first 32 bits of the AUTHENTICATION_DATA field
   MUST be a Key-ID to be used to identify the appropriate key.  Each
   key must also be configured with lifetime parameters for the time
   period within which it is valid as well as an associated
   cryptographic algorithm parameter specifying the algorithm to be used
   with the key.  At a minimum, all SESSION_AUTH implementations MUST
   support the HMAC-SHA2-256 [RFC4868] [RFC2104] cryptographic algorithm
   for computing the authentication data.

   It is good practice to regularly change keys.  Keys MUST be
   configurable such that their lifetimes overlap, thereby allowing
   smooth transitions between keys.  At the midpoint of the lifetime
   overlap between two keys, senders should transition from using the
   current key to the next/longer-lived key.  Meanwhile, receivers
   simply accept any identified key received within its configured
   lifetime and reject those that are not.




Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 16]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


4.2.  Kerberos

   Since Kerberos [RFC4120] is widely used for end-user authorization,
   e.g., in Windows domains, it is well suited for being used in the
   context of user-based authorization for NSIS sessions.  For instance,
   a user may request a ticket for authorization to install rules in an
   NATFW-capable router.

   In a Kerberos environment, it is assumed that the user of the NSLP
   requesting host requests a ticket from the Kerberos Key Distribution
   Center (KDC) for using the NSLP node (router) as a resource (target
   service).  The NSLP requesting host (client) can present the ticket
   to the NSLP node via Kerberos by sending a KRB_CRED message to the
   NSLP node independently but prior to the NSLP exchange.  Thus, the
   principal name of the service must be known at the client in advance,
   though the exact IP address may not be known in advance.  How the
   name is assigned and made available to the client is implementation
   specific.  The extracted common session key can subsequently be used
   to employ the HMAC_SIGNED variant of the SESSION_AUTH object.

   Another option is to encapsulate the credentials in the
   AUTHENTICATION_DATA portion of the SESSION_AUTH object.  In this
   case, the AUTH_ENT_ID MUST be of the sub-type KRB_PRINCIPAL.  The
   KRB_PRINCIPAL field is defined as the Fully Qualified Kerberos
   Principal name of the authorizing entity.  The AUTHENTICATION_DATA
   portion of the SESSION_AUTH object contains the KRB_CRED message that
   the receiving NSLP node has to extract and verify.  A second
   SESSION_AUTH object of type HMAC_SIGNED SHOULD protect the integrity
   of the NSLP message, including the prior SESSION_AUTH object.  The
   session key included in the first SESSION_AUTH object has to be used
   for HMAC calculation.

   An example of the Kerberos AUTHENTICATION_DATA object is shown below
   in Figure 2.

















Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 17]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |1|0|0|0| Type = SESSION_AUTH   |0|0|0|0|    Object Length      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |   AUTH_ENT_ID |  KERB_P.      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   OctetString ...   (The principal@realm name)                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |   AUTH_DATA   |     zero      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   OctetString ...   (KRB_CRED Data)                           |
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+

        Figure 2: Example of a Kerberos AUTHENTICATION_DATA Object

4.3.  Public Key

   In a public key environment, the AUTH_ENT_ID MUST be of the sub-
   types: X509_V3_CERT or PGP_CERT.  The authentication data is used for
   authenticating the authorizing entity.  Two examples of the public
   key SESSION_AUTH object are shown in Figures 3 and 4.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |1|0|0|0| Type = SESSION_AUTH   |0|0|0|0|    Object Length      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |   AUTH_ENT_ID |   PGP_CERT    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   OctetString ...   (Authorizing entity Digital Certificate)  |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |   AUTH_DATA   |     zero      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   OctetString ...   (Authentication data)                     |
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+

    Figure 3: Example of a SESSION_AUTH_OBJECT Using a PGP Certificate













Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 18]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |1|0|0|0| Type = SESSION_AUTH   |0|0|0|0|    Object   Length    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |   AUTH_ENT_ID | X509_V3_CERT  |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   OctetString ...   (Authorizing entity Digital Certificate)  |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |   AUTH_DATA   |     zero      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   OctetString ...   (Authentication data)                     |
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+

     Figure 4: Example of a SESSION_AUTH_OBJECT Using an X509_V3_CERT
                                Certificate

4.3.1.  Operational Setting for Public-Key-Based Authentication

   Public-key-based authentication assumes the following:

   o  Authorizing entities have a pair of keys (private key and public
      key).

   o  The private key is secured with the authorizing entity.

   o  Public keys are stored in digital certificates; a trusted party,
      the certificate authority (CA), issues these digital certificates.

   o  The verifier (PDP or router) has the ability to verify the digital
      certificate.

   The authorizing entity uses its private key to generate
   AUTHENTICATION_DATA.  Authenticators (router, PDP) use the
   authorizing entity's public key (stored in the digital certificate)
   to verify and authenticate the object.

4.3.1.1.  X.509 V3 Digital Certificates

   When the AUTH_ENT_ID is of type X509_V3_CERT, AUTHENTICATION_DATA
   MUST be generated by the authorizing entity following these steps:

   o  A signed-data is constructed as defined in RFC 5652 [RFC5652].  A
      digest is computed on the content (as specified in Section 6.1)
      with a signer-specific message-digest algorithm.  The certificates
      field contains the chain of X.509 V3 digital certificates from
      each authorizing entity.  The certificate revocation list is




Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 19]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


      defined in the crls field.  The digest output is digitally signed
      following Section 8 of RFC 3447 [RFC3447], using the signer's
      private key.

   When the AUTH_ENT_ID is of type X509_V3_CERT, verification at the
   verifying network element (PDP or router) MUST be done following
   these steps:

   o  Parse the X.509 V3 certificate to extract the distinguished name
      of the issuer of the certificate.

   o  Certification Path Validation is performed as defined in Section 6
      of RFC 5280 [RFC5280].

   o  Parse through the Certificate Revocation list to verify that the
      received certificate is not listed.

   o  Once the X.509 V3 certificate is validated, the public key of the
      authorizing entity can be extracted from the certificate.

   o  Extract the digest algorithm and the length of the digested data
      by parsing the CMS (Cryptographic Message Syntax) signed-data.

   o  The recipient independently computes the message digest.  This
      message digest and the signer's public key are used to verify the
      signature value.

   This verification ensures integrity, non-repudiation, and data
   origin.

4.3.1.2.  PGP Digital Certificates

   When the AUTH_ENT_ID is of type PGP_CERT, AUTHENTICATION_DATA MUST be
   generated by the authorizing entity following these steps:

   AUTHENTICATION_DATA contains a Signature Packet as defined in Section
   5.2.3 of RFC 4880 [RFC4880].  In summary:

   o  Compute the hash of all data in the SESSION_AUTH object up to the
      AUTHENTICATION_DATA.

   o  The hash output is digitally signed following Section 8 of RFC
      3447, using the signer's private key.

   When the AUTH_ENT_ID is of type PGP_CERT, verification MUST be done
   by the verifying network element (PDP or router) following these
   steps:




Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 20]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   o  Validate the certificate.

   o  Once the PGP certificate is validated, the public key of the
      authorizing entity can be extracted from the certificate.

   o  Extract the hash algorithm and the length of the hashed data by
      parsing the PGP signature packet.

   o  The recipient independently computes the message digest.  This
      message digest and the signer's public key are used to verify the
      signature value.

   This verification ensures integrity, non-repudiation, and data
   origin.

4.4.  HMAC Signed

   A SESSION_AUTH object that carries an AUTH_ENT_ID of HMAC_SIGNED is
   used as integrity protection for NSLP messages.  The SESSION_AUTH
   object MUST contain the following attributes:

   o  SOURCE_ADDR: the source address of the entity that created the
      HMAC

   o  START_TIME: the timestamp when the HMAC signature was calculated.
      This MUST be different for any two messages in sequence in order
      to prevent replay attacks.  The NTP timestamp currently provides a
      resolution of 200 picoseconds, which should be sufficient.

   o  NSLP_OBJECT_LIST: this attribute lists all NSLP objects that are
      included in HMAC calculation.

   o  AUTHENTICATION_DATA: this attribute contains the Key-ID that is
      used for HMAC calculation as well as the HMAC data itself
      [RFC2104].

   The key used for HMAC calculation must be exchanged securely by some
   other means, e.g., a Kerberos Ticket or pre-shared manual
   installation etc.  The Key-ID in the AUTHENTICATION_DATA allows the
   reference to the appropriate key and also to periodically change
   signing keys within a session.  The key length MUST be at least 64
   bits, but it is ideally longer in order to defend against brute-force
   attacks during the key validity period.  For scalability reasons it
   is suggested to use a per-user key for signing NSLP messages, but
   using a per-session key is possible, too, at the cost of a per-
   session key exchange.  A per-user key allows for verification of the
   authenticity of the message and thus provides a basis for a session-
   based per-user authorization.  It is RECOMMENDED to periodically



Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 21]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   change the shared key in order to prevent eavesdroppers from
   performing brute-force off-line attacks on the shared key.  The
   actual hash algorithm used in the HMAC computation is specified by
   the "Transform ID" field (given as Transform Type 3 of the IKEv2
   registry [RFC5996]).  The hash algorithm MUST be chosen consistently
   between the object creator and the NN verifying the HMAC; this can be
   accomplished by out-of-band mechanisms when the shared key is
   exchanged.

   Figure 5 shows an example of an object that is used for integrity
   protection of NSLP messages.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |1|0|0|0| Type = SESSION_AUTH   |0|0|0|0|    Object   Length    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |   AUTH_ENT_ID | HMAC_SIGNED   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                   reserved                    | Transform ID  |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             | SOURCE_ADDR   |  IPV4_ADDRESS |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                IPv4 Source Address of NSLP sender             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             |  START_TIME   | NTP_TIME_STAMP|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                        NTP Time Stamp (1)                     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                        NTP Time Stamp (2)                     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Length             | NSLP_OBJ_LIST |     zero      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |No. of signed NSLP objects = n |  rsv  |  NSLP object type (1) |
   +-------+-------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+
   |  rsv  | NSLP object type (2)  |             .....            //
   +-------+-------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
   |  rsv  | NSLP object type (n)  |     (padding if required)     |
   +--------------+----------------+---------------+---------------+
   |            Length             |   AUTH_DATA   |     zero      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                            Key-ID                             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |          Message Authentication Code HMAC Data                |
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+

    Figure 5: Example of a SESSION_AUTH_OBJECT That Provides Integrity
                       Protection for NSLP Messages



Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 22]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


5.  Framework

   RFC 3521 [RFC3521] describes a framework in which the SESSION_AUTH
   object may be utilized to transport information required for
   authorizing resource reservation for data flows (e.g., media flows).
   RFC 3521 introduces four different models:

   1.  The coupled model

   2.  The associated model with one policy server

   3.  The associated model with two policy servers

   4.  The non-associated model

   The fields that are required in a SESSION_AUTH object depend on which
   of the models is used.

5.1.  The Coupled Model

   In the coupled model, the only information that MUST be included in
   the SESSION_AUTH object is the SESSION_ID; it is used by the
   Authorizing Entity to correlate the resource reservation request with
   the media authorized during session setup.  Since the End Host is
   assumed to be untrusted, the Policy Server SHOULD take measures to
   ensure that the integrity of the SESSION_ID is preserved in transit;
   the exact mechanisms to be used and the format of the SESSION_ID are
   implementation dependent.

5.2.  The Associated Model with One Policy Server

   In this model, the contents of the SESSION_AUTH object MUST include:

   o  A session identifier - SESSION_ID.  This is information that the
      authorizing entity can use to correlate the resource request with
      the data flows authorized during session setup.

   o  The identity of the authorizing entity - AUTH_ENT_ID.  This
      information is used by an NN to determine which authorizing entity
      (Policy Server) should be used to solicit resource policy
      decisions.

   In some environments, an NN may have no means for determining if the
   identity refers to a legitimate Policy Server within its domain.  In
   order to protect against redirection of authorization requests to a
   bogus authorizing entity, the SESSION_AUTH MUST also include:





Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 23]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


      AUTHENTICATION_DATA.  This authentication data is calculated over
      all other fields of the SESSION_AUTH object.

5.3.  The Associated Model with Two Policy Servers

   The content of the SESSION_AUTH object is identical to the associated
   model with one policy server.

5.4.  The Non-Associated Model

   In this model, the SESSION_AUTH object MUST contain sufficient
   information to allow the Policy Server to make resource policy
   decisions autonomously from the authorizing entity.  The object is
   created using information about the session by the authorizing
   entity.  The information in the SESSION_AUTH object MUST include:

   o  Initiating party's IP address or Identity (e.g., FQDN) -
      SOURCE_ADDR X-Type

   o  Responding party's IP address or Identity (e.g., FQDN) - DEST_ADDR
      X-Type

   o  The authorization lifetime - START_TIME X-Type

   o  The identity of the authorizing entity to allow for validation of
      the token in shared symmetric key and Kerberos schemes -
      AUTH_ENT_ID X-Type

   o  The credentials of the authorizing entity in a public-key scheme -
      AUTH_ENT_ID X-Type

   o  Authentication data used to prevent tampering with the
      SESSION_AUTH object - AUTHENTICATION_DATA X-Type

   Furthermore, the SESSION_AUTH object MAY contain:

   o  The lifetime of (each of) the media stream(s) - END_TIME X-Type

   o  Initiating party's port number - SOURCE_ADDR X-Type

   o  Responding party's port number - DEST_ADDR X-Type

   All SESSION_AUTH fields MUST match with the resource request.  If a
   field does not match, the request SHOULD be denied.







Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 24]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


6.  Message Processing Rules

   This section discusses the message processing related to the
   SESSION_AUTH object.  Details of the processing of the SESSION_AUTH
   object within QoS NSLP and NATFW NSLP are described.  New NSLP
   protocols should use the same logic in making use of the SESSION_AUTH
   object.

6.1.  Generation of the SESSION_AUTH by an Authorizing Entity

   1.  Generate the SESSION_AUTH object with the appropriate contents as
       specified in Section 3.

   2.  If authentication is needed, the entire SESSION_AUTH object is
       constructed, excluding the length, type, and SubType fields of
       the SESSION_AUTH field.  Note that the message MUST include a
       START_TIME to prevent replay attacks.  The output of the
       authentication algorithm, plus appropriate header information, is
       appended as the AUTHENTICATION_DATA attribute to the SESSION_AUTH
       object.

6.2.  Processing within the QoS NSLP

   The SESSION_AUTH object may be used with QoS NSLP QUERY and RESERVE
   messages to authorize the query operation for network resources, and
   a resource reservation request, respectively.

   Moreover, the SESSION_AUTH object may also be used with RESPONSE
   messages in order to indicate that the authorizing entity changed the
   original request.  For example, the session start or end times may
   have been modified, or the client may have requested authorization
   for all ports, but the authorizing entity only allowed the use of
   certain ports.

   If the QoS NSIS Initiator (QNI) receives a RESPONSE message with a
   SESSION_AUTH object, the QNI MUST inspect the SESSION_AUTH object to
   see which authentication attribute was changed by an authorizing
   entity.  The QNI SHOULD also silently accept SESSION_AUTH objects in
   the RESPONSE message that do not indicate any change to the original
   authorization request.

6.2.1.  Message Generation

   A QoS NSLP message is created as specified in [RFC5974].

   1.  The policy element received from the authorizing entity MUST be
       copied without modification into the SESSION_AUTH object.




Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 25]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   2.  The SESSION_AUTH object (containing the policy element) is
       inserted in the NSLP message in the appropriate place.

6.2.2.  Message Reception

   The QoS NSLP message is processed as specified in [RFC5974] with the
   following modifications.

   1.  If the QoS NSIS Entity (QNE) is policy aware then it SHOULD use
       the Diameter QoS application or the RADIUS QoS protocol to
       communicate with the PDP.  To construct the AAA message it is
       necessary to extract the SESSION_AUTH object and the QoS-related
       objects from the QoS NSLP message and to craft the respective
       RADIUS or Diameter message.  The message processing and object
       format are described in the respective RADIUS or Diameter QoS
       protocol, respectively.  If the QNE is policy unaware, then it
       ignores the policy data objects and continues processing the NSLP
       message.

   2.  If the response from the PDP is negative, the request must be
       rejected.  A negative response in RADIUS is an Access-Reject, and
       in Diameter is based on the 'DIAMETER_SUCCESS' value in the
       Result-Code AVP of the QoS-Authz-Answer (QAA) message.  The QNE
       must construct and send a RESPONSE message with the status of the
       authorization failure as specified in [RFC5974].

   3.  Continue processing the NSIS message.

6.2.3.  Authorization (QNE or PDP)

   1.  Retrieve the policy element from the SESSION_AUTH object.  Check
       the AUTH_ENT_ID type and SubType fields and return an error if
       the identity type is not supported.

   2.  Verify the message integrity.

       *  Shared symmetric key authentication: The QNE or PDP uses the
          AUTH_ENT_ID field to consult a table keyed by that field.  The
          table should identify the cryptographic authentication
          algorithm to be used along with the expected length of the
          authentication data and the shared symmetric key for the
          authorizing entity.  Verify that the indicated length of the
          authentication data is consistent with the configured table
          entry and validate the authentication data.

       *  Public Key: Validate the certificate chain against the trusted
          Certificate Authority (CA) and validate the message signature
          using the public key.



Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 26]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


       *  HMAC signed: The QNE or PDP uses the Key-ID field of the
          AUTHENTICATION_DATA attribute to consult a table keyed by that
          field.  The table should identify the cryptographic
          authentication algorithm to be used along with the expected
          length of the authentication data and the shared symmetric key
          for the authorizing entity.  Verify that the indicated length
          of the authentication data is consistent with the configured
          table entry and validate the integrity of the parts of the
          NSLP message, i.e., session ID, MRI, NSLPID, and all other
          NSLP elements listed in the NSLP_OBJECT_LIST authentication
          data as well as the SESSION_AUTH object contents (cf.
          Section 6.4).

       *  Kerberos: If AUTHENTICATION_DATA contains an encapsulated
          KRB_CRED message (cf. Section 4.2), the integrity of the
          KRB_CRED message can be verified within Kerberos itself.
          Moreover, if the same NSLP message contains another
          SESSION_AUTH object using HMAC_SIGNED, the latter can be used
          to verify the message integrity as described above.

   3.  Once the identity of the authorizing entity and the validity of
       the service request have been established, the authorizing
       router/PDP MUST then consult its authorization policy in order to
       determine whether or not the specific request is finally
       authorized (e.g., based on available credits and on information
       in the subscriber's database).  To the extent to which these
       access control decisions require supplementary information,
       routers/PDPs MUST ensure that supplementary information is
       obtained securely.

   4.  Verify that the requested resources do not exceed the authorized
       QoS.

6.2.4.  Error Signaling

   When the PDP (e.g., a RADIUS or Diameter server) fails to verify the
   policy element, the appropriate actions described in the respective
   AAA document need to be taken.

   The QNE node MUST return a RESPONSE message with the INFO_SPEC error
   code 'Authorization failure' as defined in the QoS NSLP specification
   [RFC5974].  The QNE MAY include an INFO_SPEC Object Value Info to
   indicate which SESSION_AUTH attribute created the error.

6.3.  Processing with the NATFW NSLP

   This section presents processing rules for the NATFW NSLP [RFC5973].




Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 27]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


6.3.1.  Message Generation

   A NATFW NSLP message is created as specified in [RFC5973].

   1.  The policy element received from the authorizing entity MUST be
       copied without modification into the SESSION_AUTH object.

   2.  The SESSION_AUTH object (containing the policy element) is
       inserted in the NATFW NSLP message in the appropriate place.

6.3.2.  Message Reception

   The NATFW NSLP message is processed as specified in [RFC5973] with
   the following modifications.

   1.  If the router is policy aware, then it SHOULD use the Diameter
       application or the RADIUS protocol to communicate with the PDP.
       To construct the AAA message, it is necessary to extract the
       SESSION_AUTH object and the objects related to NATFW policy rules
       from the NSLP message and to craft the respective RADIUS or
       Diameter message.  The message processing and object format is
       described in the respective RADIUS or Diameter protocols.  If the
       router is policy unaware, then it ignores the policy data objects
       and continues processing the NSLP message.

   2.  Reject the message if the response from the PDP is negative.  A
       negative response in RADIUS is an Access-Reject, and in Diameter
       is based on the 'DIAMETER_SUCCESS' value in the Result-Code AVP.

   3.  Continue processing the NSIS message.

6.3.3.  Authorization (Router/PDP)

   1.  Retrieve the policy element from the SESSION_AUTH object.  Check
       the AUTH_ENT_ID type and SubType fields and return an error if
       the identity type is not supported.

   2.  Verify the message integrity.

       *  Shared symmetric key authentication: The network router/PDP
          uses the AUTH_ENT_ID field to consult a table keyed by that
          field.  The table should identify the cryptographic
          authentication algorithm to be used, along with the expected
          length of the authentication data and the shared symmetric key
          for the authorizing entity.  Verify that the indicated length
          of the authentication data is consistent with the configured
          table entry and validate the authentication data.




Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 28]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


       *  Public Key: Validate the certificate chain against the trusted
          Certificate Authority (CA) and validate the message signature
          using the public key.

       *  HMAC signed: The QNE or PDP uses the Key-ID field of the
          AUTHENTICATION_DATA attribute to consult a table keyed by that
          field.  The table should identify the cryptographic
          authentication algorithm to be used along with the expected
          length of the authentication data and the shared symmetric key
          for the authorizing entity.  Verify that the indicated length
          of the authentication data is consistent with the configured
          table entry and validate the integrity of parts of the NSLP
          message, i.e., session ID, MRI, NSLPID, and all other NSLP
          elements listed in the NSLP_OBJECT_LIST authentication data as
          well as the SESSION_AUTH object contents (cf. Section 6.4).

       *  Kerberos: If AUTHENTICATION_DATA contains an encapsulated
          KRB_CRED message (cf. Section 4.2), the integrity of the
          KRB_CRED message can be verified within Kerberos itself.
          Moreover, an if the same NSLP message contains another
          SESSION_AUTH object using HMAC_SIGNED, the latter can be used
          to verify the message integrity as described above.

   3.  Once the identity of the authorizing entity and the validity of
       the service request have been established, the authorizing
       router/PDP MUST then consult its authorization policy in order to
       determine whether or not the specific request is authorized.  To
       the extent to which these access control decisions require
       supplementary information, routers/PDPs MUST ensure that
       supplementary information is obtained securely.

6.3.4.  Error Signaling

   When the PDP (e.g., a RADIUS or Diameter server) fails to verify the
   SESSION_AUTH object, the appropriate actions described in the
   respective AAA document need to be taken.  The NATFW NSLP node MUST
   return an error message of class 'Permanent failure' (0x5) with error
   code 'Authorization failed' (0x02).

6.4.  Integrity Protection of NSLP Messages

   The SESSION_AUTH object can also be used to provide an integrity
   protection for every NSLP signaling message, thereby also
   authenticating requests or responses.  Assume that a user has
   deposited a shared key at some NN.  This NN can then verify the
   integrity of every NSLP message sent by the user to the NN.  Based on
   this authentication, the NN can apply authorization policies to
   actions like resource reservations or opening of firewall pinholes.



Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 29]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   The sender of an NSLP message creates a SESSION_AUTH object that
   contains the AUTH_ENT_ID attribute set to HMAC_SIGNED (cf.
   Section 4.4) and hashes with the shared key over all NSLP objects
   that need to be protected and lists them in the NSLP_OBJECT_LIST.
   The SESSION_AUTH object itself is also protected by the HMAC.  By
   inclusion of the SESSION_AUTH object into the NSLP message, the
   receiver of this NSLP message can verify its integrity if it has the
   suitable shared key for the HMAC.  Any response to the sender should
   also be protected by inclusion of a SESSION_AUTH object in order to
   prevent attackers from sending unauthorized responses on behalf of
   the real NN.

   If a SESSION_AUTH object is present that has an AUTH_ENT_ID attribute
   set to HMAC_SIGNED, the integrity of all NSLP elements listed in the
   NSLP_OBJECT_LIST has to be checked, including the SESSION_AUTH object
   contents itself.  Furthermore, session ID, MRI, and NSLPID have to be
   included into the HMAC calculation, too, as specified in
   Section 3.2.7.  The key that is used to calculate the HMAC is
   referred to by the Key-ID included in the AUTHENTICATION_DATA
   attribute.  If the provided timestamp in START_TIME is not recent
   enough or the calculated HMAC differs from the one provided in
   AUTHENTICATION_DATA, the message must be discarded silently and an
   error should be logged locally.

7.  Security Considerations

   This document describes a mechanism for session authorization to
   prevent theft of service.  There are three types of security issues
   to consider: protection against replay attacks, integrity of the
   SESSION_AUTH object, and the choice of the authentication algorithms
   and keys.

   The first issue, replay attacks, MUST be prevented.  In the non-
   associated model, the SESSION_AUTH object MUST include a START_TIME
   field, and the NNs as well as Policy Servers MUST support NTP to
   ensure proper clock synchronization.  Failure to ensure proper clock
   synchronization will allow replay attacks since the clocks of the
   different network entities may not be in sync.  The start time is
   used to verify that the request is not being replayed at a later
   time.  In all other models, the SESSION_ID is used by the Policy
   Server to ensure that the resource request successfully correlates
   with records of an authorized session.  If a SESSION_AUTH object is
   replayed, it MUST be detected by the policy server (using internal
   algorithms), and the request MUST be rejected.

   The second issue, the integrity of the SESSION_AUTH object, is
   preserved in untrusted environments by including the
   AUTHENTICATION_DATA attribute in such environments.



Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 30]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   In environments where shared symmetric keys are possible, they should
   be used in order to keep the SESSION_AUTH object size to a strict
   minimum, e.g., when wireless links are used.  A secondary option
   would be Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) authentication, which
   provides a high level of security and good scalability.  However, PKI
   authentication requires the presence of credentials in the
   SESSION_AUTH object, thus impacting its size.

   The SESSION_AUTH object can also serve to protect the integrity of
   NSLP message parts by using the HMAC_SIGNED Authentication Data as
   described in Section 6.4.

   When shared keys are used, e.g., in AUTHENTICATION_DATA (cf.
   Section 4.1) or in conjunction with HMAC_SIGNED (cf. Section 4.4), it
   is important that the keys are kept secret, i.e., they must be
   exchanged, stored, and managed in a secure and confidential manner,
   so that no unauthorized party gets access to the key material.  If
   the key material is disclosed to an unauthorized party,
   authentication and integrity protection are ineffective.

   Furthermore, security considerations for public-key mechanisms using
   the X.509 certificate mechanisms described in [RFC5280] apply.
   Similarly, security considerations for PGP (Pretty Good Privacy)
   described in [RFC4880] apply.

   Further security issues are outlined in RFC 4081 [RFC4081].

8.  IANA Considerations

   The SESSION_AUTH_OBJECT NSLP Message Object type is specified as
   0x016.

   This document specifies an 8-bit Session authorization attribute type
   (X-Type) field as well as 8-bit SubType fields per X-Type, for which
   IANA has created and will maintain corresponding sub-registries for
   the NSLP Session Authorization Object.

   Initial values for the X-Type registry and the registration
   procedures according to [RFC5226] are as follows:

   Registration Procedure:
      Specification Required









Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 31]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   X-Type    Description
   --------  -------------------
   0         Reserved
   1         AUTH_ENT_ID
   2         SESSION_ID
   3         SOURCE_ADDR
   4         DEST_ADDR
   5         START_TIME
   6         END_TIME
   7         NSLP_OBJECT_LIST
   8         AUTHENTICATION_DATA
   9-127     Unassigned
   128-255   Reserved for Private or Experimental Use

   In the following, registration procedures and initial values for the
   SubType registries are specified.

   Sub-registry: AUTH_ENT_ID (X-Type 1) SubType values

   Registration Procedure:
      Specification Required

   Registry:
   SubType   Description
   --------  -------------
   0         Reserved
   1         IPV4_ADDRESS
   2         IPV6_ADDRESS
   3         FQDN
   4         ASCII_DN
   5         UNICODE_DN
   6         URI
   7         KRB_PRINCIPAL
   8         X509_V3_CERT
   9         PGP_CERT
   10        HMAC_SIGNED
   11-127    Unassigned
   128-255   Reserved for Private or Experimental Use













Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 32]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   Sub-registry: SOURCE_ADDR (X-Type 3) SubType values

   Registration Procedure:
      Specification Required

   Registry:
   SubType   Description
   --------  -------------
   0         Reserved
   1         IPV4_ADDRESS
   2         IPV6_ADDRESS
   3         UDP_PORT_LIST
   4         TCP_PORT_LIST
   5         SPI
   6-127     Unassigned
   128-255   Reserved for Private or Experimental Use


   Sub-registry: DEST_ADDR (X-Type 4) SubType values

   Registration Procedure:
      Specification Required

   Registry:
   0         Reserved
   1         IPV4_ADDRESS
   2         IPV6_ADDRESS
   3         UDP_PORT_LIST
   4         TCP_PORT_LIST
   5         SPI
   6-127     Unassigned
   128-255   Reserved for Private or Experimental Use


   Sub-registry: START_TIME (X-Type 5) SubType values

   Registration Procedure:
      Specification Required

   Registry:
   SubType   Description
   --------  -------------
   0         Reserved
   1         NTP_TIMESTAMP
   2-127     Unassigned
   128-255   Reserved for Private or Experimental Use





Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 33]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   Sub-registry: END_TIME (X-Type 6) SubType values

   Registration Procedure:
      Specification Required

   Registry:
   SubType   Description
   --------  -------------
   0         Reserved
   1         NTP_TIMESTAMP
   2-127     Unassigned
   128-255   Reserved for Private or Experimental Use

9.  Acknowledgments

   We would like to thank Xioaming Fu and Lars Eggert for providing
   reviews and comments.  Helpful comments were also provided by Gen-ART
   reviewer Ben Campbell, as well as Sean Turner and Tim Polk from the
   Security Area.  This document is largely based on the RFC 3520
   [RFC3520] and credit therefore goes to the authors of RFC 3520 --
   namely, Louis-Nicolas Hamer, Brett Kosinski, Bill Gage, and Hugh
   Shieh.  Part of this work was funded by Deutsche Telekom Laboratories
   within the context of the BMBF-funded ScaleNet project.

10.  References

10.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC3447]  Jonsson, J. and B. Kaliski, "Public-Key Cryptography
              Standards (PKCS) #1: RSA Cryptography Specifications
              Version 2.1", RFC 3447, February 2003.

   [RFC5905]  Mills, D., Martin, J., Burbank, J., and W. Kasch, "Network
              Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms
              Specification", RFC 5905, June 2010.

   [RFC5971]  Schulzrinne, H. and R. Hancock, "GIST: General Internet
              Signalling Transport", RFC 5971, October 2010.

   [RFC5973]  Stiemerling, M., Tschofenig, H., Aoun, C., and E. Davies,
              "NAT/Firewall NSIS Signaling Layer Protocol (NSLP)",
              RFC 5973, October 2010.






Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 34]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   [RFC5974]  Manner, J., Karagiannis, G., and A. McDonald, "NSIS
              Signaling Layer Protocol (NSLP) for Quality-of-Service
              Signaling", RFC 5974, October 2010.

   [RFC5996]  Kaufman, C., Hoffman, P., Nir, Y., and P. Eronen,
              "Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)",
              RFC 5996, September 2010.

10.2.  Informative References

   [RFC1034]  Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities",
              STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987.

   [RFC2104]  Krawczyk, H., Bellare, M., and R. Canetti, "HMAC: Keyed-
              Hashing for Message Authentication", RFC 2104,
              February 1997.

   [RFC3520]  Hamer, L-N., Gage, B., Kosinski, B., and H. Shieh,
              "Session Authorization Policy Element", RFC 3520,
              April 2003.

   [RFC3521]  Hamer, L-N., Gage, B., and H. Shieh, "Framework for
              Session Set-up with Media Authorization", RFC 3521,
              April 2003.

   [RFC3986]  Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
              Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
              RFC 3986, January 2005.

   [RFC4080]  Hancock, R., Karagiannis, G., Loughney, J., and S. Van den
              Bosch, "Next Steps in Signaling (NSIS): Framework",
              RFC 4080, June 2005.

   [RFC4081]  Tschofenig, H. and D. Kroeselberg, "Security Threats for
              Next Steps in Signaling (NSIS)", RFC 4081, June 2005.

   [RFC4120]  Neuman, C., Yu, T., Hartman, S., and K. Raeburn, "The
              Kerberos Network Authentication Service (V5)", RFC 4120,
              July 2005.

   [RFC4514]  Zeilenga, K., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
              (LDAP): String Representation of Distinguished Names",
              RFC 4514, June 2006.

   [RFC4868]  Kelly, S. and S. Frankel, "Using HMAC-SHA-256, HMAC-SHA-
              384, and HMAC-SHA-512 with IPsec", RFC 4868, May 2007.





Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 35]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


   [RFC4880]  Callas, J., Donnerhacke, L., Finney, H., Shaw, D., and R.
              Thayer, "OpenPGP Message Format", RFC 4880, November 2007.

   [RFC5226]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
              IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
              May 2008.

   [RFC5280]  Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S.,
              Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key
              Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List
              (CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, May 2008.

   [RFC5652]  Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)", STD 70,
              RFC 5652, September 2009.





































Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 36]
^L
RFC 5981                        NSLP AUTH                  February 2011


Authors' Addresses

   Jukka Manner
   Aalto University
   Department of Communications and Networking (Comnet)
   P.O. Box 13000
   Aalto  FI-00076
   Finland

   Phone: +358 9 470 22481
   EMail: jukka.manner@tkk.fi


   Martin Stiemerling
   Network Laboratories, NEC Europe Ltd.
   Kurfuersten-Anlage 36
   Heidelberg  69115
   Germany

   Phone: +49 (0) 6221 4342 113
   EMail: martin.stiemerling@neclab.eu
   URI:   http://www.stiemerling.org


   Hannes Tschofenig
   Nokia Siemens Networks
   Linnoitustie 6
   Espoo  02600
   Finland

   Phone: +358 (50) 4871445
   EMail: Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net
   URI:   http://www.tschofenig.priv.at


   Roland Bless (editor)
   Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
   Institute of Telematics
   Zirkel 2, Building 20.20
   P.O. Box 6980
   Karlsruhe  76049
   Germany

   Phone: +49 721 608 46413
   EMail: roland.bless@kit.edu
   URI:   http://tm.kit.edu/~bless





Manner, et al.                Experimental                     [Page 37]
^L