wdiff draft-ietf-dhc-agent-vpn-id-04.txt draft-ietf-dhc-agent-vpn-id-05.txt

Network
dhc Working Group Kim Kinnear
Internet Draft Mark Stapp
Intended Status: Standards Track Richard Johnson
Expires: May 16, 2008 Jay Kumarasamy
Cisco Systems

February 2007
Expires August
November 16, 2007

Virtual Subnet Selection Sub-Option
for the Relay Agent Information Option for DHCPv4
<draft-ietf-dhc-agent-vpn-id-04.txt>
<draft-ietf-dhc-agent-vpn-id-05.txt>

Status of this Memo

By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

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."

The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

This Internet-Draft will expire on August 28, 2007. May 16, 2008.

Abstract

In some environments, a relay agent resides in a network element
which also has access to one or more virtual private networks (VPNs).
If one a DHCP server wishes to offer service to DHCP clients on those
different VPNs the DHCP server needs to know information about the
VPN on which each client resides. The virtual-subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection sub-
option of the relay-agent-information option is used by the relay
agent to tell the DHCP server important information about the VPN
(called the Virtual Subnet Selection information, or VSS) for every
DHCP request it passes on to the DHCP server, and is also used to
properly forward any DHCP reply that the DHCP server sends back to
the relay agent.

1. Introduction

There exist situations where there are multiple VPNs serviced by one
or more network elements which also contain relay agents. These
VPNs contain DHCP clients, and there is a desire to allow one a DHCP
server to supply the full range of DHCP services to these DHCP
clients.

The network element which contains the relay agent typically is also
the network element which knows about the VPN association of the DHCP
client and could include information about the VPN in the relay-
agent-information option in the client's DHCP requests. This
information about the VPN is called the Virtual Subnet Selection
information, or VSS information. This document defines a sub-option
for the relay-agent-information option which contains this VSS
information, and which allows the relay agent to communicate the VSS
information to the DHCP server.

When the DHCP server sends its response to the relay agent for
forwarding back to the DHCP client, the relay agent will also need to
use the virtual-subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option to determine to which VPN
to send the DHCP response.

This sub-option can also be used by the DHCP server to inform a relay
agent that a particular DHCP client is associated with a particular
VPN by sending the virtual-subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option in the relay-
agent-information option back to the relay agent.

Consider the following architecture:

+--------+ +---------------+
| DHCP | IP x| Relay Agent | IP z
| Server |-.......-| and +---+-------+-------+
+--------+ | VPN manager | | | |
+---+-----------+ | | |
|IP y +-----+ +--+--+ +--+--+
+-+-----+ |Host1| |Host2| |Host3|
| | +-----+ +-----+ +-----+
| |
+-----+ +--+--+ VPN 2
|Host1| |Host2|
+-----+ +-----+

VPN 1

In this architecture, the relay agent knows the VPN for each of the
DHCP clients, and inserts the VSS information about the VPN in the
virtual-subnet-selection
Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option in every DHCP request it forwards
on to the DHCP server.

When the DHCP server copies over the relay-agent-information option from
the request to incoming packet into the server's reply packet, it will copy over
the virtual-
subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option as well.

When the relay agent receives a DHCP reply packet from the server
with a virtual-subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option, it will forward the
packet onto the proper VPN based on the VSS information in the
virtual-subnet-selection
Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option.

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 RFC 2119 [RFC 2119].

This document uses the following terms:

o "DHCP client"

A DHCP client is an Internet a host using DHCP to obtain configuration
parameters such as a network address.

o "DHCP relay agent"

A DHCP relay agent is a third-party agent that transfers BOOTP
and DHCP messages between clients and servers residing on
different subnets, per [RFC 951] and [RFC 1542].

o "DHCP server"

A DHCP server is an Internet a host that returns configuration parameters to
DHCP clients.

o "downstream"

Downstream is the direction from the access concentrator towards
the subscriber.

o "upstream"

Upstream is the direction from the subscriber towards the access
concentrator.

o "VSS information"

Information about a VPN necessary to allocate an address to a
DHCP client on that VPN and necessary to forward a DHCP reply
packet to a DHCP client on that VPN.

o "VPN"

Virtual private network. A network which appears to the client
to be a private network.

o "VPN Identifier"

The VPN-ID is defined by [RFC 2685] to be a sequence of 14 hex
digits. 7
octets.

3. Virtual Subnet Selection Sub-Option Definition

The virtual-subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option MAY be used by any DHCP relay
agent which desires to specify the VSS information about a VPN from
which a DHCP client request was sent.

The virtual-subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option contains a generalized way to
specify the VSS information about a VPN.

The format of the option is:

SubOpt Len Type VPN identifier
+------+------+------+------+------+------+---
| TBD | n | t | id1 | id2 | id3 | ...
+------+------+------+------+------+------+---

Type: 0 NVT ASCII VPN identifier
1 RFC2685 VPN-ID
2-255 Not Allowed

There are two types of identifiers which can be placed in the
virtual-subnet-selection Virtual
Subnet Selection sub-option. The first type of identifier which can
be placed in the virtual-subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option is an NVT ASCII
string. It MUST NOT be terminated with a zero byte.

The second type of identifier which can be placed in the virtual-
subnet-selection Virtual
Subnet Selection sub-option is an RFC2685 VPN-ID [RFC 2685], which is
typically 14 hex digits in length (though it can
defined to be any length as far
as the virtual-subnet-selection sub-option is concerned). 7 octets in length.

All other values of the type field are invalid as of this memo and
VSS sub-options containing any other value than zero (0) or one (1)
SHOULD be ignored.

A relay agent which recieves a DHCP request from a DHCP client on a
VPN SHOULD include a virtual-subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option in the
relay-agent-information option that it inserts in the DHCP packet
prior to forwarding it on to the DHCP server.

The value placed in the virtual-subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option SHOULD be
sufficient for the relay agent to properly route any DHCP reply
packet returned from the DHCP server to the DHCP client for which it
is destined. Servers supporting this sub-option MUST return an
instance of this sub-option in the relay-agent-info option to any
relay-agent that sends it. Servers SHOULD return the an exact copy
of the sub-option unless they desire to change the VPN on which a
client was configured, which would typically be a very unusual thing
to do.

In the event that a virtual-subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection option and a virtual-
subnet-selection Virtual
Subnet Selection sub-option are both received in a particular DHCP
client packet, the information from the virtual-subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection
sub-option MUST be used in preference to the information in the
virtual-subnet-selection
Virtual Subnet Selection option. This reasoning behind this approach
is that the relay-agent is almost certainly more trusted than the
DHCP client, and therefore information in the relay-agent-information
option that conflicts with information in the packet generated by the
DHCP client is more likely to be correct.

Relay agents which include this sub-option when forwarding DHCP
client requests MUST should probably discard DHCPOFFER or DHCPACK packets
that do not contain this sub-option in their associated relay-agent-info relay-agent-
info options. This does not imply any memory of the particular
packets forwarded with this sub-option included. Rather, the
expectation is that the relay agent will use whatever algorithm that
it used on the DHCPDISCOVER and DHCPREQUEST packets to decide to
include this sub-
option sub-option on the DHCPOFFER and DHCPACK packets to
decide if they MUST should have this sub-option included in their relay-agent-info relay-
agent-info options.

In some cases, a DHCP server may use the virtual-subnet-selection

Since this sub-option is placed in the packet in order to inform a relay agent that change the
VPN on which an IP address is allocated for a particular DHCP client client,
one presumes that an allocation on that VPN is
associated with necessary for correct
operation. If this presumption is correct, then a particular VPN. It does relay agent which
places this by sending the
virtual-subnet-selection sub-option with in a packet and doesn't receive it in the appropriate information
to
returning packet should drop the relay agent packet since the IP address that was
allocated will not be in the relay-agent-information option. correct VPN. If an IP address that is
on the requested VPN is not required, then the relay agent is unable free to honor
pass the DHCP server's requirement packet along to place the DHCP client into with the IP address that is
not on the VPN it MUST drop that the packet and relay agent requested.

Servers that do not send it
to the DHCP client.

This sub-option understand this option will allocate an address
using their normal algorithms and will not return this option in the
DHCPOFFER or DHCPACK. In this case the client should consider
discarding the DHCPOFFER or DHCPACK, as mentioned above. Servers
that understand this option but are administratively configured to
ignore the option MUST ignore the option, use their normal algorithms
to allocate an address, and MUST NOT return this option in the
DHCPOFFER or DHCPACK such that the client will know that the
allocated address is not in the VPN requested and will consider this
information in deciding whether or not to accept the DHCPOFFER. In
other words, this option MUST NOT appear in a DHCPOFFER or DHCPACK
from a server unless it was used by the server in making or updating
the address allocation requested.

In some cases, a DHCP server may use the Virtual Subnet Selection
sub-option to inform a relay agent that a particular DHCP client is
associated with a particular VPN. It does this by sending the
Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option with the appropriate information
to the relay agent in the relay-agent-information option. If the
relay agent is unable to honor the DHCP server's requirement to place
the DHCP client into that VPN it MUST drop the packet and not send it
to the DHCP client.

This sub-option SHOULD NOT be used without also making use of some
form of authentication for relay-agent-information option.

4. Security

Message authentication

While this sub-option is the way that a relay-agent can insert VPN
information into a DHCP client packet that it is forwarding, when a
relay-agent needs to submit a DHCP Leasequery packet to the DHCP
server in order to recover information about existing DHCP for intradomain allocated
IP addresses on other than the normal, global VPN, it SHOULD NOT use
this sub-option. Instead, it SHOULD use where the out-of-
band exchange Virtual Subnet Selection
option, since in the context of a shared secret DHCP Leasequery the relay agent is feasible
the client and is not relaying a packet for another DHCP client.

4. Security

Message authentication in DHCP relay agents as defined in [RFC
3118]. 3040]
should be considered for relay agents employing this sub-option.
Potential exposures to attack are discussed in section 7 of the DHCP
protocol specification in [RFC 2131].

The virtual-subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option could be used by a DHCP
client masquerading as a relay agent in order to obtain an IP address
from a VPN other than the one on which it resides. This attack The DHCP server
processing for this sub-option should be aware of this possibility
and use whatever techniques it can devise to prevent such an attack.
Information such as the giaddr might be partially prevented by used to detect and prevent
this sort of attack, as well as the relay
agent not forwarding any DHCP packet which already contains a relay-
agent-information option. use of The Authentication
Suboption for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Relay
Agent Option [RFC 3040].

Any program which unicasts a DHCP packet to the DHCP server with a
relay-agent-information option in it with a vpn-id for a different
VPN would cause the DHCP server to allocate an address from that
different VPN, but since the DHCP server cannot (in general)
communicate directly back to the program that sent in the malicious
DHCP packet, the entire cycle of creating a lease will not be
completed. Certainly many leases could be offered, which would
result in a temporaty temporary form of address-pool exhaustion.

Servers that implement the virtual-subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option MUST
by default disable use of the feature; it must specifically be
enabled through configuration. Moreover, a server SHOULD provide the
ability to selectively enable use of the feature under restricted
conditions, e.g., by enabling use of the option only from explicitly
configured client-ids, enabling its use only by clients on a
particular subnet, or restricting the VPNs from which addresses may
be requested.

5. IANA Considerations

IANA is requested to assign sub-option number 151 for this sub-option
in the DHCP Relay Agent Sub-options space [RFC 3046], in accordance
with the spirit of [RFC 3942]. While [RFC 3942] doesn't explicitly
mention the sub-option space for the DHCP Relay Agent Information
option, sub-option 151 is already in use by existing implementations
of this sub-option and the current draft is essentially compatible
with these current implementations.

IANA has assigned the value of TBD for the VPN Identifier sub-option
from the DHCP Relay Agent Sub-options space [RFC 3046] for the VPN
Identifier sub-option defined in Section 3.

This document

While the type byte of the Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option
defines a number space for the type byte that could be managed by IANA, expansion of
this number space is not anticipated and so creation of a registry of
these numbers is not required by this document. In the
virtual-subnet-selection sub-option. Certain allowable event that
additional values for
this the type byte are defined in this specification (see Section 3). subsequent
documents, IANA should at that time create a registry for these type
bytes. New values for the type byte may only be defined by IETF
Consensus, as described in [RFC 2434]. Basically, this means that
they are defined by RFCs approved by the IESG.

Moreover, any changes or additions to the type byte codes MUST be
made concurrently in the type byte codes of the virtual-subnet-
selection Virtual Subnet
Selection option. The type bytes and data formats of the virtual-
subnet-selection Virtual
Subnet Selection option and virtual-subnet-selection Virtual Subnet Selection sub-option MUST
always be identical.

6. Acknowledgments

None.

7. Normative References

[RFC 951] Croft, B. and J. Gilmore, "Bootstrap Protocol", RFC 951,
September 1985.

[RFC 1542] Wimer, W., "Clarifications and Extensions for the
Bootstrap Protol", RFC 1542, October 1993.

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

[RFC 2131] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", RFC
2131, March 1997.

[RFC 2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, October
1998.

[RFC 2685] Fox, B., Gleeson, B., "Virtual Private Networks
Identifier", Internet RFC 2685, September 1999.

[RFC 3046] Patrick, M., "DHCP Relay Agent Information Option", RFC
3046, January 2001.

[RFC 3040] Stapp, M. and T. Lemon, "The Authentication Suboption for
the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Relay Agent Option"
RFC 3040, March 2005.

[RFC 3942] Volz, B., "Reclassifying Dynamic Host Configuration
Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4) Options", RFC 3942, November 2004.

8. Authors' Addresses

Kim Kinnear
Cisco Systems
1414 Massachusetts Ave.
Boxborough, Massachusetts 01719

Phone: (978) 936-0000

EMail: kkinnear@cisco.com

Richard Johnson
Jay Kumarasamy
Cisco Systems
170 W. Tasman Dr.
San Jose, CA 95134

Phone: (408) 526-4000

EMail: raj@cisco.com

Mark Stapp
Cisco Systems
1414 Massachusetts Ave.
Boxborough, Massachusetts 01719
Phone: (978) 936-0000

EMail: kkinnear@cisco.com mjs@cisco.com

Jay Kumarasamy
Richard Johnson
Cisco Systems
170 W. Tasman Dr.
San Jose, CA 95134

Phone: (408) 526-4000

EMail: jayk@cisco.com
raj@cisco.com

9. Full Copyright Statement

This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain
all their rights.

This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR
IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND THE
INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

10. Intellectual Property

The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this
document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or
might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any
independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the
procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP
78 and BCP 79.

Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt
made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be
obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at

http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights
that may cover technology that may be required to implement this
standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
ipr@ietf.org.
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.

11. Acknowledgment

Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).