Internet DRAFT - draft-learmonth-intarea-rfc1226-bis
draft-learmonth-intarea-rfc1226-bis
Network Working Group I. Learmonth
Internet-Draft HamBSD
Obsoletes: 1226 (if approved) May 23, 2021
Intended status: Experimental
Expires: November 24, 2021
Internet Protocol Encapsulation of AX.25 Frames
draft-learmonth-intarea-rfc1226-bis-03
Abstract
This document describes a method for the encapsulation of AX.25 Link
Access Protocol for Amateur Packet Radio frames within IPv4 and IPv6
packets. Obsoletes RFC1226.
Note
Comments are solicited and should be addressed to the author(s).
The sources for this draft are at:
https://github.com/irl/draft-rfc1226-bis
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 https://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 November 24, 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 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
Learmonth Expires November 24, 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft AX.25 over IP May 2021
(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 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.
1. Introduction
This document describes a method for the encapsulation of AX.25 Link
Access Protocol for Amateur Packet Radio [AX.25] frames within IPv4
and IPv6 packets. It obsoletes [RFC1226].
AX.25 is a data link layer protocol originally derived from layer 2
of the X.25 protocol suite and designed for use by amateur radio
operators. It is used extensively by amateur packet radio networks
worldwide.
In addition to specifying how packets should be encapsulated, it
gives recommendations for DiffServ codepoint marking of the
encapsulating headers based on the AX.25 frame content and provides
security considerations for the use of this encapsulation method.
2. 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].
3. Internet Protocol Encapsulation
Each AX.25 frame is encapsulated in one IPv4 or IPv6 datagram using
protocol number 93 as assigned in the Assigned Internet Protocol
Numbers registry [protocol-numbers]. For AX.25 version 2.0, the
maximum frame size expected is 330 bytes and implementations MUST be
prepared to handle frames of this size. Higher frame sizes can be
negotiated by AX.25 version 2.2 and so this is a minimum requirement
and not a limit.
HDLC framing elements (flags and zero-stuffing) are omitted, as the
IP datagram adequately delimits the beginning and end of each AX.25
frame. The CRC-16-CCITT frame check sequence (normally generated by
the HDLC transmission hardware) is included trailing the information
field. In all other respects, AX.25 frames are encapsulated
unaltered.
Learmonth Expires November 24, 2021 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft AX.25 over IP May 2021
3.1. Priority Frames
In normal operation, the DiffServ codepoint field [RFC2474] in the
encapsulating IP header SHOULD be set to best effort (BE). The
exception to this is "priority frames" as specified for AX.25 version
2.2, including acknowledgement and digipeat frames, which SHOULD have
the DiffServ codepoint set to AF21 [RFC2597]. A slot is reserved on
the radio channel for the transmission of these frames and the use of
this codepoint will permit the frames to arrive promptly at the
station for transmission.
For the avoidance of doubt: on decapsulation the AX.25 frame MUST NOT
be modified based on the DiffServ codepoint on the received
encapsulating IP header. The receiver MUST NOT use the DiffServ
codepoint to infer anything about the nature of the encapsulated
packet. It has been shown that while the AF21 codepoint may be
remarked while crossing administrative boundaries, it is unlikely
that priority inversion will occur due to remarking where such
remarking occurs [CUST18].
3.2. Automatic Packet Reporting System
Automatic Packet Reporting System [APRS] is an amateur radio-based
system for real time digital communications for local situational
awareness. APRS uses AX.25 frames for addressing, and additionally
assigns special meaning to some of the reserved bits of an AX.25
frame header.
As a special case, when used with the Automatic Packet Reporting
System [APRS], priority frames will not occur. If a tunnel is
configured as carrying APRS data, the DiffServ codepoint SHOULD by
default be set to AF11 [RFC2597]. Where the "Precedence Bit"
[RR-bits] is set (i.e. it is zero) in an APRS packet, the DiffServ
codepoint should be set to BE. Where the "Operator Present Bit"
[RR-bits] is set (i.e. it is zero), the DiffServ codepoint MAY be set
to AF21 [RFC2597].
Again, for the avoidance of doubt: on decapsulation the AX.25 frame
MUST NOT be modified based on the DiffServ codepoint on the received
encapsulating IP header. The receiver MUST NOT use the DiffServ
codepoint to infer anything about the nature of the encapsulated
packet. It has been shown that while AF codepoints may be remarked
while crossing administrative boundaries, it is unlikely that
priority inversion will occur, either with the BE traffic or between
AF PHBs due to remarking where such remarking occurs [CUST18].
It is possible depending on the nature of the tunnel that
decapsulated packets would need to be treated as third-party traffic
Learmonth Expires November 24, 2021 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft AX.25 over IP May 2021
according to the APRS specification [APRS]. In this case, the Third-
Party Network Identifier "IPENC" SHOULD be used. This is to
differentiate traffic using IP encapsulation from APRS-IS traffic
[APRS-IS] and other third-party networks.
4. Security Considerations
With the exception of control signals exchanged between earth command
stations and space stations in the amateur-satellite service, amateur
radio transmissions cannot be encoded for the purpose of obscuring
their meaning. In essence, this means that cryptography that
requires the use of secrets to decipher a message cannot be used
where the possibility exists that a packet will be transmitted by an
amateur radio station [Part97.113][OfcomTerms].
The CRC-16-CCITT provides for an integrity check but does not
guarantee the authenticity of the packet. In many jurisdictions it
is a requirement for amateur radio stations that are Internet
connected that they verify that packets for transmission have
originated from licensed radio amateurs [Part97.111][OfcomTerms].
In order to provide this guarantee, IPSec [RFC4301] SHOULD be
employed to provide authentication of packets. The neogtiated SA
SHOULD use transport mode with ESP [RFC4303] to limit the packet size
overhead incurred by use of IPSec. The traffic selector MUST match
packets with IP protocol number 93. An authentication algorithm MUST
be selected to provide data origin authentication.
The encryption algorithm MUST NOT provide confidentiality for tunnels
that will traverse an amateur radio link (i.e. the encapsulated
packets will be transmitted by an amateur radio station). The use of
the NULL algorithm [RFC2410] is RECOMMENDED for tunnels that will
traverse an amateur radio link. In cases where traffic can be known
or reasonably expected to not traverse an amateur radio link, an
encryption algorithm that provides confidentiality is RECOMMENDED.
Wrapped ESP [RFC5840] MAY be used to explicitly indicate where
"integrity-only" security is provided without data confidentiality.
When transmitted by an amateur radio station, many propagation modes
will permit wide reception of a packet. As such, receivers MUST
implement anti-replay protection by verifying received sequence
numbers [RFC4303]. The size of the anti-replay window may need to be
scaled to account not only for the speed of the link, but also for
packet loss that may occur on amateur radio links. Following
extended packet loss a sender may have advanced the sequence number
beyond the window size allowed. Dead peer detection [RFC7296] can be
used to renegotiate SAs in this case and so SHOULD be enabled for any
Learmonth Expires November 24, 2021 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft AX.25 over IP May 2021
SA expected to traverse an amateur radio link that is expected to
have varying propagation charachteristics.
Given the need for anti-replay protection, it is not possible to
manually key the SAs. IKEv2 [RFC7296] SHOULD be used to establish
SAs. Beyond the above, the exact details of the automatic keying
protocol to use and its paramaters are not specified in this
document.
5. IANA Considerations
Protocol number 93 is assigned in [protocol-numbers] and should be
updated to point to this document.
6. Acknowledgements
The author would like to acknowledge the work of Brian Kantor who
authored the original specification [RFC1226] that this document
updates.
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[AX.25] Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Corporation, "AX.25 Link
Access Protocol for Amateur Packet Radio Version 2.2",
July 1998, <https://www.tapr.org/pdf/AX25.2.2.pdf>.
[protocol-numbers]
IANA, "Assigned Internet Protocol Numbers",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/protocol-numbers/
protocol-numbers.xhtml>.
[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>.
[RFC2410] Glenn, R. and S. Kent, "The NULL Encryption Algorithm and
Its Use With IPsec", RFC 2410, DOI 10.17487/RFC2410,
November 1998, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2410>.
[RFC2474] Nichols, K., Blake, S., Baker, F., and D. Black,
"Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS
Field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers", RFC 2474,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2474, December 1998,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2474>.
Learmonth Expires November 24, 2021 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft AX.25 over IP May 2021
[RFC2597] Heinanen, J., Baker, F., Weiss, W., and J. Wroclawski,
"Assured Forwarding PHB Group", RFC 2597,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2597, June 1999,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2597>.
[RFC4301] Kent, S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the
Internet Protocol", RFC 4301, DOI 10.17487/RFC4301,
December 2005, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4301>.
[RFC4303] Kent, S., "IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)",
RFC 4303, DOI 10.17487/RFC4303, December 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4303>.
[RFC5840] Grewal, K., Montenegro, G., and M. Bhatia, "Wrapped
Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) for Traffic
Visibility", RFC 5840, DOI 10.17487/RFC5840, April 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5840>.
[RR-bits] Bruninga, B., "APRS Future Use of AX.25 SSID RR Bits",
December 2012, <http://aprs.org/aprs12/RR-bits.txt>.
7.2. Informative References
[APRS] Wade, I., Ed., "APRS Protocol Reference", August 2000,
<http://www.aprs.org/doc/APRS101.PDF>.
[APRS-IS] Loveall, P., "APRS-IS", <http://www.aprs-is.net/>.
[CUST18] Custura, A., Secchi, R., and G. Fairhurst, "Exploring DSCP
modification pathologies in the Internet", Computer
Communications Vol. 127, pp. 86-94,
DOI 10.1016/j.comcom.2018.05.016, September 2018.
[OfcomTerms]
Ofcom, "UK Amateur Radio Licence Section 2",
<https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/
pdf_file/0027/62991/amateur-terms.pdf>.
[Part97.111]
e-CFR, "Electronic Code of Federal Regulations Title 47,
Part 97.111 - Authorized transmissions",
<https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-
idx?node=pt47.5.97&rgn=div5#se47.5.97_1111>.
Learmonth Expires November 24, 2021 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft AX.25 over IP May 2021
[Part97.113]
e-CFR, "Electronic Code of Federal Regulations Title 47,
Part 97.113 - Prohibited transmissions",
<https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-
idx?node=pt47.5.97&rgn=div5#se47.5.97_1113>.
[RFC1226] Kantor, B., "Internet protocol encapsulation of AX.25
frames", RFC 1226, DOI 10.17487/RFC1226, May 1991,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1226>.
[RFC7296] Kaufman, C., Hoffman, P., Nir, Y., Eronen, P., and T.
Kivinen, "Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2
(IKEv2)", STD 79, RFC 7296, DOI 10.17487/RFC7296, October
2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7296>.
Author's Address
Iain R. Learmonth
HamBSD
Email: irl@hambsd.org
Learmonth Expires November 24, 2021 [Page 7]
