Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-sidr-policy-qualifiers
draft-ietf-sidr-policy-qualifiers
Network Working Group A. Newton
Internet-Draft ARIN
Updates: 6487 (if approved) G. Huston
Intended status: Standards Track APNIC
Expires: January 4, 2015 July 3, 2014
Policy Qualifiers in RPKI Certificates
draft-ietf-sidr-policy-qualifiers-02
Abstract
This document updates RFC 6487 by clarifying the inclusion of policy
qualifiers in the certificate policies extension of RPKI resource
certificates.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 4, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 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.
Newton & Huston Expires January 4, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft RPKI Policy Qualifiers July 2014
Table of Contents
1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Update to RFC 6487 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
2. Update to RFC 6487
[RFC6487] profiles certificates, certificate revocation lists, and
certificate signing requests specified in [RFC5280] for use in
routing public key infrastructure.
[RFC5280] defines an extension to certificates for the listing of
policy information (See section 4.2.1.4). [RFC6487] states in
Section 4.8.9: "This extension MUST be present and MUST be marked
critical. It MUST include exactly one policy, as specified in the
RPKI CP [RFC6484]". This references the CertPolicyId of the sequence
allowed in PolicyInformation as defined by [RFC5280].
[RFC5280] also specifies that PolicyInformation may optionally have a
sequence of PolicyQualifierInfo objects. [RFC6487] does not
specifically allow or disallow these PolicyQualifierInfo objects
although it also states in section 4: "Unless specifically noted as
being OPTIONAL, all the fields listed here MUST be present, and any
other fields MUST NOT appear in a conforming resource certificate."
Because there is a need for some RPKI Certificate Authorities to
include policy qualifiers in their certificates, this document
updates [RFC6487], Section 4.8.9, as follows:
OLD:
This extension MUST be present and MUST be marked critical. It
MUST include exactly one policy, as specified in the RPKI
Certificate Policy (CP) [RFC6484].
NEW:
Newton & Huston Expires January 4, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft RPKI Policy Qualifiers July 2014
This extension MUST be present and MUST be marked critical. It
MUST include exactly one policy, as specified in the RPKI CP
[RFC6484]. Exactly one policy qualifier MAY be included. If a
policy qualifier is included, the policyQualifierId MUST be the
Certification Practice Statement (CPS) pointer qualifier type
(id-qt-cps).
As noted in [RFC5280], section 4.2.1.4: "Optional qualifiers, which
MAY be present, are not expected to change the definition of the
policy." In this case any optional policy qualifier that MAY be
present in a resource certificate MUST NOT change the definition of
the RPKI CP [RFC6484].
3. IANA Considerations
None.
4. Security Considerations
The Security Considerations of [RFC6487] apply to this document.
This document updates the RPKI certificate profile to specify that
the certificate policies extension can include a policy qualifier,
which is a URI. While de-referencing the URI is not required for
certificate validation, doing so could provide a denial-of-service
(DoS) vector, where the target host may be subjected to bogus work
de-referencing the URI. However, this specification, like [RFC5280],
places no processing requirements on the URI included in the
qualifier.
As an update to [RFC6487], this document broadens the class of
certificates that conform to the RPKI profile by explicitly including
within the profile those certificates that contain a policy qualifier
as described here. A relying party that performs a strict validation
based on [RFC6487] and fails to support the updates described in this
document, would incorrectly invalidate RPKI objects that include the
changes in Section 2.
5. Acknowledgments
Frank Hill and Adam Guyot helped define the scope of this issue and
identified and worked with RPKI validator implementers to clarify the
use of policy qualifiers in resource certificates.
Sean Turner provided significant text to this document regarding the
processing of the CPS URI and limiting the scope of the allowable
content of the policy qualifier.
Newton & Huston Expires January 4, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft RPKI Policy Qualifiers July 2014
6. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[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.
[RFC6484] Kent, S., Kong, D., Seo, K., and R. Watro, "Certificate
Policy (CP) for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure
(RPKI)", BCP 173, RFC 6484, February 2012.
[RFC6487] Huston, G., Michaelson, G., and R. Loomans, "A Profile for
X.509 PKIX Resource Certificates", RFC 6487, February
2012.
Authors' Addresses
Andrew Lee Newton
American Registry for Internet Numbers
3635 Concorde Parkway
Chantilly, VA 20151
USA
Email: andy@arin.net
URI: http://www.arin.net
Geoff Huston
Asia Pacific Network Information Center
6 Cordelia Street
South Brisbane QLD 4101
Australia
Email: gih@apnic.net
URI: http://www.apnic.net
Newton & Huston Expires January 4, 2015 [Page 4]
