Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-pkix-ipki2opp3
draft-ietf-pkix-ipki2opp3
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 06:23:22 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.20 (Unix)
Last-Modified: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 16:32:00 GMT
ETag: "304c1a-294c-350ea580"
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 10572
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/plain
PKIX Working Group R. Housley
Internet Draft SPYRUS
expires in six months September 1997
Internet Public Key Infrastructure
Operational Protocols: FTP and HTTP
<draft-ietf-pkix-ipki2opp3-00.txt>
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft. Internet-Drafts are working
documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas,
and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet- Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the
"1id-abstracts.txt" listing contained in the Internet- Drafts Shadow
Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), nic.nordu.net (Europe),
munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim), ds.internic.net (US East Coast), or
ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast).
Abstract
The protocol conventions described in this document satisfy some of
the operational requirements of the Internet Public Key
Infrastructure (PKI). This document specifies the conventions for
using the File Transfer Protocol (FTP) and the Hypertext Transfer
Protocol (HTTP) to obtain certificates and certificate revocation
lists (CRLs) from PKI repositories. Additional mechanisms addressing
PKIX operational requirements are specified in separate documents.
Please send comments on this document to the ietf-pkix@tandem.com
mail list.
Housley [Page 1]
INTERNET DRAFT September 1997
1 Introduction
This specification is part of a multi-part standard for the Internet
Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) using X.509 certificates and
certificate revocation lists (CRLs). This document specifies the
conventions for using the File Transfer Protocol (FTP) and the
Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) to obtain certificates and CRLs
from PKI repositories. Additional mechanisms addressing PKI
repository access are specified in separate documents.
1.1 Model
Following is a simplified view of the architectural model assumed by
the Internet PKI specifications.
+---+
| C | +------------+
| e | <-------------------->| End entity |
| r | Operational +------------+
| t | transactions ^
| | and management | Management
| / | transactions | transactions
| | |
| C | PKI users v
| R | -------+-------+--------+------
| L | PKI management ^ ^
| | entities | |
| | v |
| R | +------+ |
| e | <-------------- | RA | <-----+ |
| p | certificate | | | |
| o | publish +------+ | |
| s | | |
| I | v v
| t | +------------+
| o | <--------------------------| CA |
| r | certificate publish +------------+
| y | CRL publish ^
| | |
+---+ | Management
| transactions
v
+------+
| CA |
+------+
Figure 1 - Internet PKI Entities
Housley [Page 2]
INTERNET DRAFT September 1997
The components in this model are:
End Entity: user of PKI certificates and/or end user system that
is the subject of a certificate;
CA: certification authority;
RA: registration authority, i.e., an optional system to
which a CA delegates certain management functions;
Repository: a system or collection of distributed systems that
store certificates and CRLs and serves as a means of
distributing these certificates and CRLs to end
entities.
1.2 Certificate and CRL Repository
Some CAs mandate the use of on-line validation services, while others
distribute CRLs to allow certificate users to perform certificate
validation themselves. In general, CAs make CRLs available to
certificate users by publishing them in the Directory. The Directory
is also the normal distribution mechanism for certificates. However,
Directory Services are not available in many parts of the Internet
today. The File Transfer Protocol (FTP) defined in RFC 959 and the
Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) defined in RFC 2068 offer
alternate methods for certificate and CRL distribution.
End entities and CAs may retrieve certificates and CRLs from the
repository using FTP or HTTP. Likewise, end entities, RAs, and CAs
may publish certificates and CRLs in the repository using FTP or
HTTP.
2 FTP Conventions
Within certificate extensions and CRL extensions, the URI form of
GeneralName is used to specify the location where issuer certificates
and CRLs may be obtained. For instance, a URI identifying the
subject of a certificate may be carried in subjectAltName certificate
extension. An IA5String describes the use of anonymous FTP to fetch
certificate or CRL information. For example:
ftp://ftp.netcom.com/sp/spyrus/housley.cer
ftp://ftp.your.org/pki/id48.cer
ftp://ftp.your.org/pki/id48.no42.crl
Internet users may publish the URI reference to a file that contains
their certificate on their business card. This practice is useful
when there is no Directory entry for that user. FTP is widely
Housley [Page 3]
INTERNET DRAFT September 1997
deployed, and anonymous FTP are accommodated by many firewalls.
Thus, FTP is an attractive alternatives to Directory access protocols
for certificate and CRL distribution. While this service satisfies
the requirement to retrieve information related to a certificate
which is already identified by a URI, it is not intended to satisfy
the more general problem of finding a certificate for a user about
whom some other information, such as their electronic mail address or
corporate affiliation, is known.
For convenience, the names of files that contain certificates should
have a suffix of ".cer". Each ".cer" file contains exactly one
certificate, encoded in DER format. Likewise, the names of files
that contain CRLs should have a suffix of ".crl". Each ".crl" file
contains exactly one CRL, encoded in DER format.
3 HTTP Conventions
Within certificate extensions and CRL extensions, the URI form of
GeneralName is used to specify the location where issuer certificates
and CRLs may be obtained. For instance, a URI identifying the
subject of a certificate may be carried in subjectAltName certificate
extension. An IA5String describes the use of HTTP to fetch
certificate or CRL information. For example:
http://www.netcom.com/sp/spyrus/housley.cer
http://www.your.org/pki/id48.cer
http://www.your.org/pki/id48.no42.crl
Internet users may publish the URI reference to a file that contains
their certificate on their business card. This practice is useful
when there is no Directory entry for that user. HTTP is widely
deployed, and HTTP is accommodated by many firewalls. Thus, HTTP is
an attractive alternatives to Directory access protocols for
certificate and CRL distribution. While this service satisfies the
requirement to retrieve information related to a certificate which is
already identified by a URI, it is not intended to satisfy the more
general problem of finding a certificate for a user about whom some
other information, such as their electronic mail address or corporate
affiliation, is known.
For convenience, the names of files that contain certificates should
have a suffix of ".cer". Each ".cer" file contains exactly one
certificate, encoded in DER format. Likewise, the names of files
that contain CRLs should have a suffix of ".crl". Each ".crl" file
contains exactly one CRL, encoded in DER format.
**(Note - still outstanding is the definition of specific content
type label (mime type) with content in specific syntax.)
Housley [Page 4]
INTERNET DRAFT September 1997
References
[RFC 959] J. Postel and J. Reynolds, "File Transfer Protocol (FTP),"
RFC 959, October 1985.
[RFC 1738] T. Berners-Lee, L. Masinter, and M. McCahill, "Uniform
Resource Locators (URL)," December 1994.
[RFC 2068] R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, and
T. Berners-Lee; "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1,"
RFC 2068, January 1997.
Security Considerations
Since certificates and CRLs digitally signed, no additional integrity
service is necessary. Neither certificates nor CRLs need be kept
secret, and anonymous access to certificates and CRLs is generally
acceptable. So, no privacy service is necessary.
Operators of FTP sites and World Wide Web servers should authenticate
end entities, CAs, and RAs who publish certificates and CRLs.
However, authentication is not necessary to retrieve certificates and
CRLs.
Author Address
Russell Housley
SPYRUS
PO Box 1198
Herndon, VA 20172
USA
housley@spyrus.com
Housley [Page 5]
--=====================_875063157==_--
