summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc9185.txt
blob: f89076ca54d0a33bd79b3b1df652c945318cc861 (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
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                          P. Jones
Request for Comments: 9185                                 Cisco Systems
Category: Informational                                    P. Ellenbogen
ISSN: 2070-1721                                     Princeton University
                                                             N. Ohlmeier
                                                               8x8, Inc.
                                                              April 2022


     DTLS Tunnel between a Media Distributor and Key Distributor to
                        Facilitate Key Exchange

Abstract

   This document defines a protocol for tunneling DTLS traffic in
   multimedia conferences that enables a Media Distributor to facilitate
   key exchange between an endpoint in a conference and the Key
   Distributor.  The protocol is designed to ensure that the keying
   material used for hop-by-hop encryption and authentication is
   accessible to the Media Distributor, while the keying material used
   for end-to-end encryption and authentication is inaccessible to the
   Media Distributor.

Status of This Memo

   This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
   published for informational purposes.

   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 candidates for any level of Internet
   Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9185.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2022 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
   (https://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 Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the
   Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described
   in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction
   2.  Conventions Used in This Document
   3.  Tunneling Concept
   4.  Example Message Flows
   5.  Tunneling Procedures
     5.1.  Endpoint Procedures
     5.2.  Tunnel Establishment Procedures
     5.3.  Media Distributor Tunneling Procedures
     5.4.  Key Distributor Tunneling Procedures
     5.5.  Versioning Considerations
   6.  Tunneling Protocol
     6.1.  TunnelMessage Structure
     6.2.  SupportedProfiles Message
     6.3.  UnsupportedVersion Message
     6.4.  MediaKeys Message
     6.5.  TunneledDtls Message
     6.6.  EndpointDisconnect Message
   7.  Example Binary Encoding
   8.  IANA Considerations
   9.  Security Considerations
   10. References
     10.1.  Normative References
     10.2.  Informative References
   Acknowledgements
   Authors' Addresses

1.  Introduction

   An objective of Privacy-Enhanced RTP Conferencing (PERC) [RFC8871] is
   to ensure that endpoints in a multimedia conference have access to
   the end-to-end (E2E) and hop-by-hop (HBH) keying material used to
   encrypt and authenticate Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) packets
   [RFC3550], while the Media Distributor has access only to the HBH
   keying material for encryption and authentication.

   This specification defines a tunneling protocol that enables the
   Media Distributor to tunnel DTLS messages [RFC9147] between an
   endpoint and a Key Distributor, thus allowing an endpoint to use DTLS
   for the Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (DTLS-SRTP) [RFC5764] for
   establishing encryption and authentication keys with the Key
   Distributor.

   The tunnel established between the Media Distributor and Key
   Distributor is a TLS connection [RFC8446] that is established before
   any messages are forwarded by the Media Distributor on behalf of
   endpoints.  DTLS packets received from an endpoint are encapsulated
   by the Media Distributor inside this tunnel as data to be sent to the
   Key Distributor.  Likewise, when the Media Distributor receives data
   from the Key Distributor over the tunnel, it extracts the DTLS
   message inside and forwards the DTLS message to the endpoint.  In
   this way, the DTLS association for the DTLS-SRTP procedures is
   established between an endpoint and the Key Distributor, with the
   Media Distributor forwarding DTLS messages between the two entities
   via the established tunnel to the Key Distributor and having no
   visibility into the confidential information exchanged.

   Following the existing DTLS-SRTP procedures, the endpoint and Key
   Distributor will arrive at a selected cipher and keying material,
   which are used for HBH encryption and authentication by both the
   endpoint and the Media Distributor.  However, since the Media
   Distributor would not have direct access to this information, the Key
   Distributor explicitly shares the HBH key information with the Media
   Distributor via the tunneling protocol defined in this document.
   Additionally, the endpoint and Key Distributor will agree on a cipher
   for E2E encryption and authentication.  The Key Distributor will
   transmit keying material to the endpoint for E2E operations but will
   not share that information with the Media Distributor.

   By establishing this TLS tunnel between the Media Distributor and Key
   Distributor and implementing the protocol defined in this document,
   it is possible for the Media Distributor to facilitate the
   establishment of a secure DTLS association between an endpoint and
   the Key Distributor in order for the endpoint to generate E2E and HBH
   keying material.  At the same time, the Key Distributor can securely
   provide the HBH keying material to the Media Distributor.

2.  Conventions Used in This Document

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
   BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

   This document uses the terms "endpoint", "Media Distributor", and
   "Key Distributor" defined in [RFC8871].

3.  Tunneling Concept

   A TLS connection (tunnel) is established between the Media
   Distributor and the Key Distributor.  This tunnel is used to relay
   DTLS messages between the endpoint and Key Distributor, as depicted
   in Figure 1:

                              +-------------+
                              |     Key     |
                              | Distributor |
                              +-------------+
                                  # ^ ^ #
                                  # | | # <-- TLS Tunnel
                                  # | | #
     +----------+             +-------------+             +----------+
     |          |     DTLS    |             |    DTLS     |          |
     | Endpoint |<------------|    Media    |------------>| Endpoint |
     |          |    to Key   | Distributor |   to Key    |          |
     |          | Distributor |             | Distributor |          |
     +----------+             +-------------+             +----------+

                  Figure 1: TLS Tunnel to Key Distributor

   The three entities involved in this communication flow are the
   endpoint, the Media Distributor, and the Key Distributor.  The
   behavior of each entity is described in Section 5.

   The Key Distributor is a logical function that might be co-resident
   with a key management server operated by an enterprise, might reside
   in one of the endpoints participating in the conference, or might
   reside at some other location that is trusted with E2E keying
   material.

4.  Example Message Flows

   This section provides an example message flow to help clarify the
   procedures described later in this document.  It is necessary that
   the Key Distributor and Media Distributor establish a mutually
   authenticated TLS connection for the purpose of sending tunneled
   messages, though the complete TLS handshake for the tunnel is not
   shown in Figure 2 because there is nothing new this document
   introduces with regard to those procedures.

   Once the tunnel is established, it is possible for the Media
   Distributor to relay the DTLS messages between the endpoint and the
   Key Distributor.  Figure 2 shows a message flow wherein the endpoint
   uses DTLS-SRTP to establish an association with the Key Distributor.
   In the process, the Media Distributor shares its supported SRTP
   protection profile information (see [RFC5764]), and the Key
   Distributor shares the HBH keying material and selected cipher with
   the Media Distributor.

     Endpoint              Media Distributor          Key Distributor
         |                         |                         |
         |                         |<=======================>|
         |                         |    TLS Connection Made  |
         |                         |                         |
         |                         |========================>|
         |                         | SupportedProfiles       |
         |                         |                         |
         |------------------------>|========================>|
         | DTLS handshake message  | TunneledDtls            |
         |                         |                         |
              .... may be multiple handshake messages ...
         |                         |                         |
         |<------------------------|<========================|
         | DTLS handshake message  |            TunneledDtls |
         |                         |                         |
         |                         |                         |
         |                         |<========================|
         |                         |               MediaKeys |

             Figure 2: Sample DTLS-SRTP Exchange via the Tunnel

   After the initial TLS connection has been established, each of the
   messages on the right-hand side of Figure 2 is a tunneling protocol
   message, as defined in Section 6.

   SRTP protection profiles supported by the Media Distributor will be
   sent in a SupportedProfiles message when the TLS tunnel is initially
   established.  The Key Distributor will use that information to select
   a common profile supported by both the endpoint and the Media
   Distributor to ensure that HBH operations can be successfully
   performed.

   As DTLS messages are received from the endpoint by the Media
   Distributor, they are forwarded to the Key Distributor encapsulated
   inside a TunneledDtls message.  Likewise, as TunneledDtls messages
   are received by the Media Distributor from the Key Distributor, the
   encapsulated DTLS packet is forwarded to the endpoint.

   The Key Distributor will provide the SRTP keying material [RFC3711]
   to the Media Distributor for HBH operations via the MediaKeys
   message.  The Media Distributor will extract this keying material
   from the MediaKeys message when received and use it for HBH
   encryption and authentication.

5.  Tunneling Procedures

   The following subsections explain in detail the expected behavior of
   the endpoint, the Media Distributor, and the Key Distributor.

   It is important to note that the tunneling protocol described in this
   document is not an extension to TLS or DTLS.  Rather, it is a
   protocol that transports DTLS messages generated by an endpoint or
   Key Distributor as data inside of the TLS connection established
   between the Media Distributor and Key Distributor.

5.1.  Endpoint Procedures

   The endpoint follows the procedures outlined for DTLS-SRTP [RFC5764]
   in order to establish the cipher and keys used for encryption and
   authentication, with the endpoint acting as the client and the Key
   Distributor acting as the server.  The endpoint does not need to be
   aware of the fact that DTLS messages it transmits toward the Media
   Distributor are being tunneled to the Key Distributor.

   The endpoint MUST include a unique identifier in the tls-id Session
   Description Protocol (SDP) attribute [RFC8866] in all offer and
   answer messages [RFC3264] that it generates, as per [RFC8842].
   Further, the endpoint MUST include this same unique identifier in the
   external_session_id extension [RFC8844] in the ClientHello message
   when establishing a DTLS association.

   When receiving an external_session_id value from the Key Distributor,
   the client MUST check to ensure that value matches the tls-id value
   received in SDP.  If the values do not match, the endpoint MUST
   consider any received keying material to be invalid and terminate the
   DTLS association.

5.2.  Tunnel Establishment Procedures

   Either the Media Distributor or Key Distributor initiates the
   establishment of a TLS tunnel.  Which entity acts as the TLS client
   when establishing the tunnel and what event triggers the
   establishment of the tunnel are outside the scope of this document.
   Further, how the trust relationships are established between the Key
   Distributor and Media Distributor are also outside the scope of this
   document.

   A tunnel MUST be a mutually authenticated TLS connection.

   The Media Distributor or Key Distributor MUST establish a tunnel
   prior to forwarding tunneled DTLS messages.  Given the time-sensitive
   nature of DTLS-SRTP procedures, a tunnel SHOULD be established prior
   to the Media Distributor receiving a DTLS message from an endpoint.

   A single tunnel MAY be used to relay DTLS messages between any number
   of endpoints and the Key Distributor.

   A Media Distributor MAY have more than one tunnel established between
   itself and one or more Key Distributors.  When multiple tunnels are
   established, which tunnel or tunnels to use to send messages for a
   given conference is outside the scope of this document.

5.3.  Media Distributor Tunneling Procedures

   The first message transmitted over the tunnel is the
   SupportedProfiles message (see Section 6).  This message informs the
   Key Distributor about which DTLS-SRTP profiles the Media Distributor
   supports.  This message MUST be sent each time a new tunnel
   connection is established or, in the case of connection loss, when a
   connection is re-established.  The Media Distributor MUST support the
   same list of protection profiles for the duration of any endpoint-
   initiated DTLS association and tunnel connection.

   The Media Distributor MUST assign a unique association identifier for
   each endpoint-initiated DTLS association and include it in all
   messages forwarded to the Key Distributor.  The Key Distributor will
   subsequently include this identifier in all messages it sends so that
   the Media Distributor can map messages received via a tunnel and
   forward those messages to the correct endpoint.  The association
   identifier MUST be a version 4 Universally Unique Identifier (UUID),
   as described in Section 4.4 of [RFC4122].

   When a DTLS message is received by the Media Distributor from an
   endpoint, it forwards the UDP payload portion of that message to the
   Key Distributor encapsulated in a TunneledDtls message.  The Media
   Distributor is not required to forward all messages received from an
   endpoint for a given DTLS association through the same tunnel if more
   than one tunnel has been established between it and a Key
   Distributor.

   When a MediaKeys message is received, the Media Distributor MUST
   extract the cipher and keying material conveyed in order to
   subsequently perform HBH encryption and authentication operations for
   RTP and RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) packets sent between it and an
   endpoint.  Since the HBH keying material will be different for each
   endpoint, the Media Distributor uses the association identifier
   included by the Key Distributor to ensure that the HBH keying
   material is used with the correct endpoint.

   The Media Distributor MUST forward all DTLS messages received from
   either the endpoint or the Key Distributor (via the TunneledDtls
   message) to ensure proper communication between those two entities.

   When the Media Distributor detects an endpoint has disconnected or
   when it receives conference control messages indicating the endpoint
   is to be disconnected, the Media Distributor MUST send an
   EndpointDisconnect message with the association identifier assigned
   to the endpoint to the Key Distributor.  The Media Distributor SHOULD
   take a loss of all RTP and RTCP packets as an indicator that the
   endpoint has disconnected.  The particulars of how RTP and RTCP are
   to be used to detect an endpoint disconnect, such as timeout period,
   are not specified.  The Media Distributor MAY use additional
   indicators to determine when an endpoint has disconnected.

5.4.  Key Distributor Tunneling Procedures

   Each TLS tunnel established between the Media Distributor and the Key
   Distributor MUST be mutually authenticated.

   When the Media Distributor relays a DTLS message from an endpoint,
   the Media Distributor will include an association identifier that is
   unique per endpoint-originated DTLS association.  The association
   identifier remains constant for the life of the DTLS association.
   The Key Distributor identifies each distinct endpoint-originated DTLS
   association by the association identifier.

   When processing an incoming endpoint association, the Key Distributor
   MUST extract the external_session_id value transmitted in the
   ClientHello message and match that against the tls-id value the
   endpoint transmitted via SDP.  If the values in SDP and the
   ClientHello message do not match, the DTLS association MUST be
   rejected.

   The process through which the tls-id value in SDP is conveyed to the
   Key Distributor is outside the scope of this document.

   The Key Distributor MUST match the fingerprint of the certificate and
   external_session_id [RFC8844] received from the endpoint via DTLS
   with the expected fingerprint [RFC8122] and tls-id [RFC8842] values
   received via SDP.  It is through this process that the Key
   Distributor can be sure to deliver the correct conference key to the
   endpoint.

   The Key Distributor MUST report its own unique identifier in the
   external_session_id extension.  This extension is sent in the
   EncryptedExtensions message in DTLS 1.3 and the ServerHello message
   in previous DTLS versions.  This value MUST also be conveyed back to
   the client via SDP as a tls-id attribute.

   The Key Distributor MUST encapsulate any DTLS message it sends to an
   endpoint inside a TunneledDtls message (see Section 6).  The Key
   Distributor is not required to transmit all messages for a given DTLS
   association through the same tunnel if more than one tunnel has been
   established between it and the Media Distributor.

   The Key Distributor MUST use the same association identifier in
   messages sent to an endpoint as was received in messages from that
   endpoint.  This ensures the Media Distributor can forward the
   messages to the correct endpoint.

   The Key Distributor extracts tunneled DTLS messages from an endpoint
   and acts on those messages as if that endpoint had established the
   DTLS association directly with the Key Distributor.  The Key
   Distributor is acting as the DTLS server, and the endpoint is acting
   as the DTLS client.  The handling of the messages and certificates is
   exactly the same as normal DTLS-SRTP procedures between endpoints.

   The Key Distributor MUST send a MediaKeys message to the Media
   Distributor immediately after the DTLS handshake completes.  The
   MediaKeys message includes the selected cipher (i.e., protection
   profile), Master Key Identifier (MKI) value [RFC3711] (if any), HBH
   SRTP master keys, and SRTP master salt values.  The Key Distributor
   MUST use the same association identifier in the MediaKeys message as
   is used in the TunneledDtls messages for the given endpoint.

   There are presently two SRTP protection profiles defined for PERC,
   namely DOUBLE_AEAD_AES_128_GCM_AEAD_AES_128_GCM and
   DOUBLE_AEAD_AES_256_GCM_AEAD_AES_256_GCM [RFC8723].  As explained in
   Section 5.2 of [RFC8723], the Media Distributor is only given the
   SRTP master key for HBH operations.  As such, the SRTP master key
   length advertised in the MediaKeys message is half the length of the
   key normally associated with the selected "double" protection
   profile.

   The Key Distributor uses the certificate fingerprint of the endpoint
   along with the unique identifier received in the external_session_id
   extension to determine with which conference a given DTLS association
   is associated.

   The Key Distributor MUST select a cipher that is supported by itself,
   the endpoint, and the Media Distributor to ensure proper HBH
   operations.

   When the DTLS association between the endpoint and the Key
   Distributor is terminated, regardless of which entity initiated the
   termination, the Key Distributor MUST send an EndpointDisconnect
   message with the association identifier assigned to the endpoint to
   the Media Distributor.

5.5.  Versioning Considerations

   Since the Media Distributor sends the first message over the tunnel,
   it effectively establishes the version of the protocol to be used.
   If that version is not supported by the Key Distributor, the Key
   Distributor MUST transmit an UnsupportedVersion message containing
   the highest version number supported and close the TLS connection.

   The Media Distributor MUST take note of the version received in an
   UnsupportedVersion message and use that version when attempting to
   re-establish a failed tunnel connection.  Note that it is not
   necessary for the Media Distributor to understand the newer version
   of the protocol to understand that the first message received is an
   UnsupportedVersion message.  The Media Distributor can determine from
   the first four octets received what the version number is and that
   the message is an UnsupportedVersion message.  The rest of the data
   received, if any, would be discarded and the connection closed (if
   not already closed).

6.  Tunneling Protocol

   Tunneled messages are transported via the TLS tunnel as application
   data between the Media Distributor and the Key Distributor.  Tunnel
   messages are specified using the format described in [RFC8446],
   Section 3.  As in [RFC8446], all values are stored in network byte
   (big endian) order; the uint32 represented by the hex bytes 01 02 03
   04 is equivalent to the decimal value 16909060.

   This protocol defines several different messages, each of which
   contains the following information:

   *  message type identifier

   *  message body length

   *  the message body

   Each of the tunnel messages is a TunnelMessage structure with the
   message type indicating the actual content of the message body.

6.1.  TunnelMessage Structure

   TunnelMessage defines the structure of all messages sent via the
   tunnel protocol.  That structure includes a field called msg_type
   that identifies the specific type of message contained within
   TunnelMessage.

   enum {
       supported_profiles(1),
       unsupported_version(2),
       media_keys(3),
       tunneled_dtls(4),
       endpoint_disconnect(5),
       (255)
   } MsgType;

   opaque uuid[16];

   struct {
       MsgType msg_type;
       uint16 length;
       select (MsgType) {
           case supported_profiles:  SupportedProfiles;
           case unsupported_version: UnsupportedVersion;
           case media_keys:          MediaKeys;
           case tunneled_dtls:       TunneledDtls;
           case endpoint_disconnect: EndpointDisconnect;
     } body;
   } TunnelMessage;

   The elements of TunnelMessage include:

   msg_type:  the type of message contained within the structure body.

   length:  the length in octets of the following body of the message.

   body:  the actual message being conveyed within this TunnelMessage
      structure.

6.2.  SupportedProfiles Message

   The SupportedProfiles message is defined as:

   uint8 SRTPProtectionProfile[2]; /* from RFC 5764 */

   struct {
       uint8 version;
       SRTPProtectionProfile protection_profiles<2..2^16-1>;
   } SupportedProfiles;

   The elements of SupportedProfiles include:

   version:  this document specifies version 0x00.

   protection_profiles:  the list of two-octet SRTP protection profile
      values, as per [RFC5764], supported by the Media Distributor.

6.3.  UnsupportedVersion Message

   The UnsupportedVersion message is defined as:

   struct {
       uint8 highest_version;
   } UnsupportedVersion;

   UnsupportedVersion contains this single element:

   highest_version:  indicates the highest version of the protocol
      supported by the Key Distributor.

6.4.  MediaKeys Message

   The MediaKeys message is defined as:

   struct {
       uuid association_id;
       SRTPProtectionProfile protection_profile;
       opaque mki<0..255>;
       opaque client_write_SRTP_master_key<1..255>;
       opaque server_write_SRTP_master_key<1..255>;
       opaque client_write_SRTP_master_salt<1..255>;
       opaque server_write_SRTP_master_salt<1..255>;
   } MediaKeys;

   The fields are described as follows:

   association_id:  a value that identifies a distinct DTLS association
      between an endpoint and the Key Distributor.

   protection_profiles:  the value of the two-octet SRTP protection
      profile value, as per [RFC5764], used for this DTLS association.

   mki:  master key identifier [RFC3711]; a zero-length field indicates
      that no MKI value is present.

   client_write_SRTP_master_key:  the value of the SRTP master key used
      by the client (endpoint).

   server_write_SRTP_master_key:  the value of the SRTP master key used
      by the server (Media Distributor).

   client_write_SRTP_master_salt:  the value of the SRTP master salt
      used by the client (endpoint).

   server_write_SRTP_master_salt:  the value of the SRTP master salt
      used by the server (Media Distributor).

6.5.  TunneledDtls Message

   The TunneledDtls message is defined as:

   struct {
       uuid association_id;
       opaque dtls_message<1..2^16-1>;
   } TunneledDtls;

   The fields are described as follows:

   association_id:  a value that identifies a distinct DTLS association
      between an endpoint and the Key Distributor.

   dtls_message:  the content of the DTLS message received by the
      endpoint or to be sent to the endpoint, including one or more
      complete DTLS records.

6.6.  EndpointDisconnect Message

   The EndpointDisconnect message is defined as:

   struct {
       uuid association_id;
   } EndpointDisconnect;

   The field is described as follows:

   association_id:  a value that identifies a distinct DTLS association
      between an endpoint and the Key Distributor.

7.  Example Binary Encoding

   The TunnelMessage is encoded in binary, following the procedures
   specified in [RFC8446].  This section provides an example of what the
   bits on the wire would look like for the SupportedProfiles message
   that advertises support for both
   DOUBLE_AEAD_AES_128_GCM_AEAD_AES_128_GCM and
   DOUBLE_AEAD_AES_256_GCM_AEAD_AES_256_GCM [RFC8723].

   TunnelMessage:
            message_type: 0x01
                  length: 0x0007
       SupportedProfiles:
                      version:  0x00
          protection_profiles:  0x0004 (length)
                                0x0009000A (value)

   Thus, the encoding on the wire, presented here in network byte order,
   would be this stream of octets:

   0x0100070000040009000A

8.  IANA Considerations

   This document establishes the "Datagram Transport Layer Security
   (DTLS) Tunnel Protocol Message Types for Privacy Enhanced
   Conferencing" registry to contain message type values used in the
   DTLS tunnel protocol.  These message type values are a single octet
   in length.  This document defines the values shown in Table 1 below,
   leaving the balance of possible values reserved for future
   specifications:

             +=========+====================================+
             | MsgType | Description                        |
             +=========+====================================+
             |   0x01  | Supported SRTP Protection Profiles |
             +---------+------------------------------------+
             |   0x02  | Unsupported Version                |
             +---------+------------------------------------+
             |   0x03  | Media Keys                         |
             +---------+------------------------------------+
             |   0x04  | Tunneled DTLS                      |
             +---------+------------------------------------+
             |   0x05  | Endpoint Disconnect                |
             +---------+------------------------------------+

                Table 1: Message Type Values for the DTLS
                             Tunnel Protocol

   The value 0x00 is reserved, and all values in the range 0x06 to 0xFF
   are available for allocation.  The procedures for updating this table
   are those defined as "IETF Review" in Section 4.8 of [RFC8126].

9.  Security Considerations

   Since the procedures in this document rely on TLS [RFC8446] for
   transport security, the security considerations for TLS should be
   reviewed when implementing the protocol defined in this document.

   While the tunneling protocol defined in this document does not use
   DTLS-SRTP [RFC5764] directly, it does convey and negotiate some of
   the same information (e.g., protection profile data).  As such, a
   review of the security considerations found in that document may be
   useful.

   This document describes a means of securely exchanging keying
   material and cryptographic transforms for both E2E and HBH encryption
   and authentication of media between an endpoint and a Key Distributor
   via a Media Distributor.  Additionally, the procedures result in
   delivering HBH information to the intermediary Media Distributor.
   The Key Distributor and endpoint are the only two entities with
   access to both the E2E and HBH keys, while the Media Distributor has
   access to only HBH information.  Section 8.2 of [RFC8871] enumerates
   various attacks against which one must guard when implementing a
   Media Distributor; these scenarios are important to note.

   A requirement in this document is that a TLS connection between the
   Media Distributor and the Key Distributor be mutually authenticated.
   The reason for this requirement is to ensure that only an authorized
   Media Distributor receives the HBH keying material.  If an
   unauthorized Media Distributor gains access to the HBH keying
   material, it can easily cause service degradation or denial by
   transmitting HBH-valid packets that ultimately fail E2E
   authentication or replay protection checks (see Section 3.3.2 of
   [RFC3711]).  Even if service does not appear degraded in any way,
   transmitting and processing bogus packets are a waste of both
   computational and network resources.

   The procedures defined in this document assume that the Media
   Distributor will properly convey DTLS messages between the endpoint
   and Key Distributor.  Should it fail in that responsibility by
   forwarding DTLS messages from endpoint A advertised as being from
   endpoint B, this will result in a failure at the DTLS layer of those
   DTLS sessions.  This could be an additional attack vector that Key
   Distributor implementations should consider.

   While E2E keying material passes through the Media Distributor via
   the protocol defined in this document, the Media Distributor has no
   means of gaining access to that information and therefore cannot
   affect the E2E media processing function in the endpoint except to
   present it with invalid or replayed data.  That said, any entity
   along the path that interferes with the DTLS exchange between the
   endpoint and the Key Distributor, including a malicious Media
   Distributor that is not properly authorized, could prevent an
   endpoint from properly communicating with the Key Distributor and
   therefore prevent successful conference participation.

   It is worth noting that a compromised Media Distributor can convey
   information to an adversary, such as participant IP addresses,
   negotiated protection profiles, or other metadata.  While [RFC8871]
   explains that a malicious or compromised Media Distributor can
   disrupt communications, an additional attack vector introduced by
   this protocol is the potential disruption of DTLS negotiation or
   premature removal of a participant from a conference by sending an
   EndpointDisconnect message to the Key Distributor.

   The Key Distributor should be aware of the possibility that a
   malicious Media Distributor might transmit an EndpointDisconnect
   message to the Key Distributor when the endpoint is in fact still
   connected.

   While the Security Considerations section of [RFC8871] describes
   various attacks one needs to consider with respect to the Key
   Distributor and denial of service, use of this protocol introduces
   another possible attack vector.  Consider the case where a malicious
   endpoint sends unsolicited DTLS-SRTP messages to a Media Distributor.
   The Media Distributor will normally forward those messages to the Key
   Distributor and, if found invalid, such messages only serve to
   consume resources on both the Media Distributor and Key Distributor.

10.  References

10.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC3711]  Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K.
              Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)",
              RFC 3711, DOI 10.17487/RFC3711, March 2004,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3711>.

   [RFC4122]  Leach, P., Mealling, M., and R. Salz, "A Universally
              Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace", RFC 4122,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4122, July 2005,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4122>.

   [RFC5764]  McGrew, D. and E. Rescorla, "Datagram Transport Layer
              Security (DTLS) Extension to Establish Keys for the Secure
              Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)", RFC 5764,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5764, May 2010,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5764>.

   [RFC8122]  Lennox, J. and C. Holmberg, "Connection-Oriented Media
              Transport over the Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
              in the Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 8122,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8122, March 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8122>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

   [RFC8446]  Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
              Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>.

   [RFC8723]  Jennings, C., Jones, P., Barnes, R., and A.B. Roach,
              "Double Encryption Procedures for the Secure Real-Time
              Transport Protocol (SRTP)", RFC 8723,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8723, April 2020,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8723>.

   [RFC8842]  Holmberg, C. and R. Shpount, "Session Description Protocol
              (SDP) Offer/Answer Considerations for Datagram Transport
              Layer Security (DTLS) and Transport Layer Security (TLS)",
              RFC 8842, DOI 10.17487/RFC8842, January 2021,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8842>.

   [RFC8844]  Thomson, M. and E. Rescorla, "Unknown Key-Share Attacks on
              Uses of TLS with the Session Description Protocol (SDP)",
              RFC 8844, DOI 10.17487/RFC8844, January 2021,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8844>.

   [RFC8871]  Jones, P., Benham, D., and C. Groves, "A Solution
              Framework for Private Media in Privacy-Enhanced RTP
              Conferencing (PERC)", RFC 8871, DOI 10.17487/RFC8871,
              January 2021, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8871>.

   [RFC9147]  Rescorla, E., Tschofenig, H., and N. Modadugu, "The
              Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) Protocol Version
              1.3", RFC 9147, DOI 10.17487/RFC9147, April 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9147>.

10.2.  Informative References

   [RFC3264]  Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model
              with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC3264, June 2002,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3264>.

   [RFC3550]  Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V.
              Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time
              Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, DOI 10.17487/RFC3550,
              July 2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3550>.

   [RFC8126]  Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
              Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
              RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.

   [RFC8866]  Begen, A., Kyzivat, P., Perkins, C., and M. Handley, "SDP:
              Session Description Protocol", RFC 8866,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8866, January 2021,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8866>.

Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to thank David Benham and Cullen Jennings for
   reviewing this document and providing constructive comments.

Authors' Addresses

   Paul E. Jones
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   7025 Kit Creek Rd.
   Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709
   United States of America
   Phone: +1 919 476 2048
   Email: paulej@packetizer.com


   Paul M. Ellenbogen
   Princeton University
   Phone: +1 206 851 2069
   Email: pe5@cs.princeton.edu


   Nils H. Ohlmeier
   8x8, Inc.
   Phone: +1 408 659 6457
   Email: nils@ohlmeier.org