draft-ietf-geopriv-radius-lo-14.txt   draft-ietf-geopriv-radius-lo-15.txt 
GEOPRIV H. Tschofenig, Ed. GEOPRIV H. Tschofenig, Ed.
Internet-Draft Nokia Siemens Networks Internet-Draft Nokia Siemens Networks
Intended status: Standards Track F. Adrangi Intended status: Standards Track F. Adrangi
Expires: January 5, 2008 Intel Expires: January 10, 2008 Intel
M. Jones M. Jones
A. Lior A. Lior
Bridgewater Bridgewater
July 4, 2007 July 9, 2007
Carrying Location Objects in RADIUS and Diameter Carrying Location Objects in RADIUS and Diameter
draft-ietf-geopriv-radius-lo-14.txt draft-ietf-geopriv-radius-lo-15.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware 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 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. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
skipping to change at page 1, line 38 skipping to change at page 1, line 38
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 5, 2008. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 10, 2008.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
Abstract Abstract
This document describes procedures for conveying access network This document describes procedures for conveying access network
ownership and location information based on a civic and geospatial ownership and location information based on a civic and geospatial
location format in Remote Authentication Dial In User Service location format in Remote Authentication Dial In User Service
skipping to change at page 3, line 12 skipping to change at page 3, line 12
Dealing with mechanisms to preserve the user's privacy is important Dealing with mechanisms to preserve the user's privacy is important
and addressed in this document. and addressed in this document.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Delivery Methods for Location Information . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. Delivery Methods for Location Information . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1. Location Delivery based on Out-of-Band Agreements . . . . 6 3.1. Location Delivery based on Out-of-Band Agreements . . . . 6
3.2. Location Delivery based on Initial Request . . . . . . . . 7 3.2. Location Delivery based on Initial Request . . . . . . . . 7
3.3. Location Delivery based on Mid-Session Request . . . . . . 9 3.3. Location Delivery based on Mid-Session Request . . . . . . 8
3.4. Location Delivery in Accounting Messages . . . . . . . . . 11 3.4. Location Delivery in Accounting Messages . . . . . . . . . 12
4. Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 4. Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.1. Operator-Name Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 4.1. Operator-Name Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.2. Location-Information Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4.2. Location-Information Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.3. Location Data Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 4.3. Location-Data Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.3.1. Civic Location Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.3.1. Civic Location Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.3.2. Geospatial Location Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.3.2. Geospatial Location Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.4. Basic Policy Rules Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.4. Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.5. Extended Policy Rules Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4.5. Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute . . . . . . . . . 24
4.6. Location-Capable Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 4.6. Location-Capable Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.7. Requested-Info Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 4.7. Requested-Location-Info Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
5. Table of Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 5. Table of Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
6. Diameter RADIUS Interoperability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 6. Diameter RADIUS Interoperability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
7.1. Communication Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 7.1. Communication Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
7.2. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 7.2. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
7.2.1. RADIUS Client . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 7.2.1. RADIUS Client . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
7.2.2. RADIUS Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 7.2.2. RADIUS Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
7.2.3. RADIUS Proxy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 7.2.3. RADIUS Proxy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
7.3. Identity Information and Location Information . . . . . . 37 7.3. Identity Information and Location Information . . . . . . 40
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
8.1. New Registry: Operator Namespace Identifier . . . . . . . 39 8.1. New Registry: Operator Namespace Identifier . . . . . . . 42
8.2. New Registry: Location Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 8.2. New Registry: Location Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
8.3. New Registry: Location Capable Attribute . . . . . . . . . 41 8.3. New Registry: Location Capable Attribute . . . . . . . . . 44
8.4. New Registry: Entity Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 8.4. New Registry: Entity Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
8.5. New Registry: Privacy Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 8.5. New Registry: Privacy Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
8.6. New Registry: Requested-Info Attribute . . . . . . . . . . 42 8.6. New Registry: Requested-Location-Info Attribute . . . . . 45
9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Appendix A. Matching with Geopriv Requirements . . . . . . . . . 49 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Appendix A. Matching with Geopriv Requirements . . . . . . . . . 54
A.1. Distribution of Location Information at the User's A.1. Distribution of Location Information at the User's
Home Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Home Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
A.2. Distribution of Location Information at the Visited A.2. Distribution of Location Information at the Visited
Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
A.3. Requirements matching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 A.3. Requirements matching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 58 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 63
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document defines attributes within RADIUS and Diameter that can
be used to convey location-related information within authentication
and accounting exchanges.
Location information may be useful in a number of scenarios.
Wireless networks (including wireless LAN) are being deployed in Wireless networks (including wireless LAN) are being deployed in
public places such as airports, hotels, shopping malls, and coffee public places such as airports, hotels, shopping malls, and coffee
shops by a diverse set of operators such as cellular network shops by a diverse set of operators such as cellular network
operators, Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs), and fixed operators, Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs), and fixed
broadband operators. The proposed attributes are also applicable to broadband operators. In these situations, the home network may need
other situations (such as wired networks) where operator network to know the location of the user, in order to enable location-aware
ownership and location information has to be conveyed to the RADIUS billing, location-aware authorization, or other location-aware
server. services. Location information can also prove useful in other
situations (such as wired networks) where operator network ownership
In the case when the home network needs to know the location of the and location information may be needed by the home network.
user then, when a user executes the network access authentication
procedure, information about the location and ownership of the
visited network needs to be conveyed to the user's home network. The
main intent of this document is to enable location aware billing
(e.g., by determining the appropriate tariff and taxation in
dependence of the location of the access network and the end host),
location aware subscriber authentication and authorization for
roaming environments and to enable other location aware services.
This document describes attributes to convey location-related
information both within authentication and accounting exchanges.
These attributes are usable both within RADIUS and Diameter.
Location information needs to be protected against unauthorized In order to preserve user privacy, location information needs to be
access and distribution to preserve the user's privacy. [10] defines protected against unauthorized access and distribution. Requirements
requirements for a protocol-independent model for the access to for access to location information are defined in [RFC3693]. The
geographic location information. The model includes a Location model includes a Location Generator (LG) that creates location
Generator (LG) that creates location information, a Location Server information, a Location Server (LS) that authorizes access to
(LS) that authorizes access to location information, a Location location information, a Location Recipient (LR) that requests and
Recipient (LR) that requests and receives information, and a Rule receives information, and a Rule Maker (RM) that provides
Maker (RM) that provides authorization policies to the LS which authorization policies to the LS which enforces access control
enforces access control policies on requests to location information. policies on requests to location information. In Appendix A the
In Appendix A the requirements for a GEOPRIV Using Protocol are requirements for a GEOPRIV Using Protocol are compared to the
compared to the functionality provided by this document. functionality provided by this document.
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [1]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
RADIUS specific terminology is borrowed from [2] and [11]. RADIUS specific terminology is borrowed from [RFC2865] and [RFC2866].
Terminology related to privacy issues, location information and Terminology related to privacy issues, location information and
authorization policy rules is taken from [10]. authorization policy rules is taken from [RFC3693].
3. Delivery Methods for Location Information 3. Delivery Methods for Location Information
The following exchanges show how location information is conveyed in The following exchanges show how location information is conveyed in
RADIUS. Note that the description of the individual scenarios RADIUS. In describing the usage scenarios, we assume that privacy
assumes that privacy policies allow location conveyed in RADIUS; policies allow location to be conveyed in RADIUS; however, as noted
however the exchanges are also applicableto Diameter, as noted in in Section 6 similar exchanges can also take place within Diameter.
Section 6. A discussion about the privacy treatment is provided in Privacy issues are discussed in Section 7.2.
Section 7.2.
3.1. Location Delivery based on Out-of-Band Agreements 3.1. Location Delivery based on Out-of-Band Agreements
Figure 1 shows an example message flow for delivering location Figure 1 shows an example message flow for delivering location
information during the network access authentication and information during the network access authentication and
authorization procedure. Upon a network authentication request from authorization procedure. Upon a network authentication request from
an access network client, the Network Access Server (NAS) submits a an access network client, the Network Access Server (NAS) submits a
RADIUS Access-Request message that contains location information RADIUS Access-Request message that contains location information
attributes among other required attributes. In this scenario attributes among other required attributes. In this scenario
location information is attached to the Access-Request message location information is attached to the Access-Request message
without an explicit request from the RADIUS server. Note that such without an explicit request from the RADIUS server. Note that such
an approach with a prior agreement between the RADIUS client and the an approach with a prior agreement between the RADIUS client and the
RADIUS server is only applicable in certain environments. For RADIUS server is only applicable in certain environments, such as in
example, in deployment environments where the RADIUS client and the situations where the RADIUS client and server are within the same
RADIUS server belong to the same organizational entity. The Basic- administrative domain. The Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute is
Policy-Rules attribute is populated based on the defaults described populated based on the defaults described in Section 4.4, unless it
in Section 4.4, unless it has been explicitly configured otherwise. has been explicitly configured otherwise.
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
| | | Network | | RADIUS | | | | Network | | RADIUS |
| User | | Access | | Server | | User | | Access | | Server |
| | | Server | | | | | | Server | | |
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
| | | | | |
| Authentication phase | | | Authentication phase | |
| begin | | | begin | |
|---------------------->| | |---------------------->| |
| | | | | |
| | RADIUS |
| | Access-Request | | | Access-Request |
| | + Location-Information | | | + Location-Information |
| | + Location-Data | | | + Location-Data |
| | + Basic-Policy-Rules | | | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules|
| | + Operator-Name | | | + Operator-Name |
| |----------------------------->| | |----------------------------->|
| | | | | |
| | RADIUS |
| | Access-Accept | | | Access-Accept |
| |<-----------------------------| | |<-----------------------------|
| Authentication | | | Authentication | |
| Success | | | Success | |
|<----------------------| | |<----------------------| |
| | | | | |
Figure 1: Location Delivery based on out-of-band Agreements Figure 1: Location Delivery based on out-of-band Agreements
3.2. Location Delivery based on Initial Request 3.2. Location Delivery based on Initial Request
If no location information is provided by the RADIUS client although If the RADIUS client provides a Location-Capable Attribute in the
it is needed by the RADIUS server to compute the authorization Access-Request, then the RADIUS server MAY challenge the RADIUS
decision then, if the Location-Capable attribute is included in the client for location information if it requires that information for
Access-Request message, then the RADIUS server MAY challenge the authorization, and location information was not provided in Access-
RADIUS client. This exchange is shown in Figure 2. The inclusion of Request. This exchange is shown in Figure 2. The inclusion of the
the Location-Capable attribute in an Access-Request message indicates Location-Capable Attribute in an Access-Request message indicates
that the NAS supports this specification and is capable of providing that the NAS supports this specification and is capable of providing
location in response to an Access-Challenge. The subsequent Access- location in response to an Access-Challenge. The subsequent Access-
Challenge message sent from the RADIUS server to the NAS provides a Challenge message sent from the RADIUS server to the NAS provides a
hint regarding the type of desired location information attributes. hint regarding the type of desired location information attributes.
The NAS treates the Basic-Policy-Rules and Extended-Policy-Rules The NAS treates the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules and Extended-
attributes as opaque data (e.g., it echoes these rules provided by Location-Policy-Rules Attributes as opaque data (e.g., it echoes
the server within the Access-Challenge back in the Access-Request). these rules provided by the server within the Access-Challenge back
In the shown message flow the location attributes are then provided in the Access-Request). In the shown message flow the location
in the subsequent Access-Request message. When receiving this attributes are then provided in the subsequent Access-Request
Access-Request message the authorization procedure at the RADIUS message. When receiving this Access-Request message the
server might be based on a number of criteria, including the newly authorization procedure at the RADIUS server might be based on a
defined attributes listed in Section 4. number of criteria, including the newly defined attributes listed in
Section 4.
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
| | | Network | | RADIUS | | | | Network | | RADIUS |
| User | | Access | | Server | | User | | Access | | Server |
| | | Server | | | | | | Server | | |
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
| | | | | |
| Authentication phase | | | Authentication phase | |
| begin | | | begin | |
|---------------------->| | |---------------------->| |
| | | | | |
| | RADIUS |
| | Access-Request | | | Access-Request |
| | + Location-Capable | | | + Location-Capable |
| |----------------------------->| | |--------------------------------->|
| | | | | |
| | RADIUS |
| | Access-Challenge | | | Access-Challenge |
| | + Basic-Policy-Rules | | | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules |
| | + Extended-Policy-Rules | | | + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules|
| | + Requested-Info | | | + Requested-Location-Info |
| |<-----------------------------| | |<---------------------------------|
| | | | | |
| | RADIUS |
| | Access-Request | | | Access-Request |
| | + Location-Information | | | + Location-Information |
| | + Location-Data | | | + Location-Data |
| | + Basic-Policy-Rules | | | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules |
| | + Extended-Policy-Rules | | | + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules|
| |----------------------------->| | |--------------------------------->|
| | | | | |
: : : : : :
: Multiple Protocol Exchanges to perform : : Multiple Protocol Exchanges to perform :
: Authentication, Key Exchange and Authorization : : Authentication, Key Exchange and Authorization :
: ...continued... : : ...continued... :
: : : : : :
| | | | | |
| | RADIUS |
| | Access-Accept | | | Access-Accept |
| |<-----------------------------| | |<---------------------------------|
| Authentication | | | Authentication | |
| Success | | | Success | |
|<----------------------| | |<----------------------| |
| | | | | |
Figure 2: Location Delivery based on Initial Request Figure 2: Location Delivery based on Initial Request
3.3. Location Delivery based on Mid-Session Request 3.3. Location Delivery based on Mid-Session Request
The on demand mid-session location delivery method utilizes the The on demand mid-session location delivery method utilizes the
Change of Authorization (COA) message, as defined in [12]. At any Change of Authorization Request (CoA-Request) message, defined in
time during the session the Dynamic Authorization Client MAY send a [I-D.ietf-radext-rfc3576bis]. At any time during the session the
COA message containing session identification attributes to the Dynamic Authorization Client MAY send a CoA-Request containing
RADIUS client (i.e., Dynamic Authorization Server). By including a session identification attributes to the NAS (i.e., Dynamic
Service-Type attribute with a value of "Authorize Only" a CoA-Request Authorization Server).
may instruct the NAS to generate an Access-Request containing a
Service-Type attribute with value "Authorize Only" in which case the
RADIUS client MUST include location information in this Access-
Request if the Requested-Info attribute included in the Access-Accept
included the flag setting 'FUTURE_REQUESTS'. This also implies the
echoing of the Basic-Policy-Rules and Extended-Policy-Rules
attributes received in the previous Access-Accept within the Access-
Request sent in response to the CoA-Request.
Figure 3 shows the approach graphically.
+---------------+ +---------------+
| Dynamic | | Dynamic |
| Authorization | | Authorization |
| Server | | Client |
+---------------+ +---------------+
| |
| |
: :
: Initial Protocol Interaction :
: (details omitted) :
: :
| |
| Access-Accept |
| + Requested-Info (FUTURE_REQUESTS) |
| + Basic-Policy-Rules |
| + Extended-Policy-Rules |
|<----------------------------------------------|
| |
: :
: <<Some time later>> :
: :
| |
| COA + Service-Type "Authorize Only" |
|<----------------------------------------------|
| |
| COA NAK + Service-Type "Authorize Only" |
| + Error-Cause "Request Initiated" |
|---------------------------------------------->|
| |
| Access-Request + Service-Type "Authorize Only"|
| + Location-Information |
| + Location-Data |
| + Basic-Policy-Rules |
| + Extended-Policy-Rules |
|---------------------------------------------->|
| |
| Access-Accept |
|<----------------------------------------------|
| |
Figure 3: Location Delivery based on Mid-Session Request By including a Service-Type Attribute with a value of "Authorize
Only" a CoA-Request may instruct the NAS to generate an Access-
Request containing a Service-Type Attribute with value "Authorize
Only" in which case the RADIUS client MUST include location
information in this Access-Request if the Requested-Location-Info
Attribute included in the Access-Accept included the flag setting
'FUTURE_REQUESTS'. This also implies the echoing of the Basic-
Location-Policy-Rules and Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes
received in the previous Access-Accept within the Access-Request sent
in response to the CoA-Request.
Upon receiving the Access-Request message containing the Service-Type Upon receiving the Access-Request message containing the Service-Type
attribute with a value of Authorize-Only from the NAS, the RADIUS Attribute with a value of Authorize-Only from the NAS, the RADIUS
server responds with either an Access-Accept or an Access-Reject server responds with either an Access-Accept or an Access-Reject
message. message.
RFC 3576 [3] is needed when location information is requested on RFC 3576 [RFC3576] is necessary when location information is needed
demand and location information cannot be obtained from accounting on demand and cannot be obtained from accounting information in a
messages at all or not in a timely fashion. timely fashion.
Figure 3 shows the above-described approach graphically.
+---------------+ +---------------+ +------+
| Dynamic | | Dynamic | |RADIUS|
| Authorization | | Authorization | |Server|
| Server/NAS | | Client | | |
+---------------+ +---------------+ +------+
| | |
| Access-Request | |
| + Location-Capable | |
|----------------------------------------------------------->|
| | |
| Access-Challenge | |
| + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Requested-Location-Info | |
|<-----------------------------------------------------------|
| | |
| Access-Request | |
| + Location-Information | |
| + Location-Data | |
| + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | |
|----------------------------------------------------------->|
| | |
| | |
: | :
: Multiple Protocol Exchanges to perform :
: Authentication, Key Exchange and Authorization :
: ...continued... | :
: | :
| | |
| | |
| Access-Accept | |
| + Requested-Location-Info | |
(FUTURE_REQUESTS,...) | |
| + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | |
|<-----------------------------------------------------------|
| | |
: : :
: <<Some time later>> : :
: : :
| | |
| CoA + Service-Type "Authorize Only" | |
|<--------------------------------------------| |
| | |
| CoA NAK + Service-Type "Authorize Only" | |
| + Error-Cause "Request Initiated" | |
|-------------------------------------------->| |
| | |
| Access-Request | |
| + Service-Type "Authorize Only" | |
| + Location-Information | |
| + Location-Data | |
| + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | |
|----------------------------------------------------------->|
| Access-Accept | |
|<-----------------------------------------------------------|
| | |
Figure 3: Location Delivery based on CoA with Service-Type 'Authorize
Only'
When the Dynamic Authorization Client wants to change the values of
the requested location information, or set the values of the
requested location information for the first time, it may do so
without triggering a reauthorization. Assuming that the NAS had
previously sent an Access-Request containing a Location-Capable
Attribute, the DAC can send a CoA-Request to the NAS without a
Service-Type Attribute, but including the NAS Identifiers and Session
identifers as per RFC 3576 and the Requested-Location-Info, Basic-
Location-Policy-Rules and Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes.
The Requested-Location-Info, Basic-Location-Policy-Rules and
Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes MUST NOT be used for
session identification.
Figure 4 shows this approach graphically.
+---------------+ +---------------+ +------+
| Dynamic | | Dynamic | |RADIUS|
| Authorization | | Authorization | |Server|
| Server/NAS | | Client | | |
+---------------+ +---------------+ +------+
| | |
| | |
| Access-Request | |
| + Location-Capable | |
|----------------------------------------------------------->|
| | |
| Access-Challenge | |
| + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Requested-Location-Info | |
|<-----------------------------------------------------------|
| | |
| Access-Request | |
| + Location-Information | |
| + Location-Data | |
| + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | |
|----------------------------------------------------------->|
| | |
| | |
: | :
: Multiple Protocol Exchanges to perform :
: Authentication, Key Exchange and Authorization :
: ...continued... | :
: | :
| | |
| | |
| Access-Accept | |
| + Requested-Location-Info | |
| + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | |
|<-----------------------------------------------------------|
| | |
: : :
: <<Some time later>> : :
: : :
| | |
| CoA | |
| + Requested-Location-Info | |
| + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | |
|<--------------------------------------------| |
| | |
| CoA ACK | |
|-------------------------------------------->| |
| | |
: : :
: <<Further exchanges later>> : :
: : :
Figure 4: Location Delivery based on CoA
3.4. Location Delivery in Accounting Messages 3.4. Location Delivery in Accounting Messages
Location Information may also be reported in accounting messages. Location Information may also be reported in accounting messages.
Accounting messages are generated when the session starts, when the Accounting messages are generated when the session starts, when the
session stops and periodically during the lifetime of the session. session stops and periodically during the lifetime of the session.
Accounting messages may also be generated when the user roams during Accounting messages may also be generated when the user roams during
handoff. handoff.
Accounting information may be needed by the billing system to Accounting information may be needed by the billing system to
calculate the user's bill. For example, there may be different calculate the user's bill. For example, there may be different
tariffs or tax rates applied based on the location. tariffs or tax rates applied based on the location.
If the RADIUS server needs to obtain location information in If the RADIUS server needs to obtain location information in
accounting messages then it needs to include a Requested-Info accounting messages then it needs to include a Requested-Location-
attribute to the Access-Accept message. The Basic-Policy-Rules and Info Attribute to the Access-Accept message. The Basic-Location-
the Extended-Policy-Rules attributes are to be echoed in the Policy-Rules and the Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes are to
Accounting-Request if indicated in the Access-Accept. be echoed in the Accounting-Request if indicated in the Access-
Accept.
Figure 4 shows the message exchange. Figure 5 shows the message exchange.
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
| | | Network | | RADIUS | | | | Network | | RADIUS |
| User | | Access | | Server | | User | | Access | | Server |
| | | Server | | | | | | Server | | |
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
| | | | | |
: : : : : :
: Initial Protocol Interaction : : Initial Protocol Interaction :
: (details omitted) : : (details omitted) :
: : : : : :
| | | | | |
| | RADIUS |
| | Access-Accept | | | Access-Accept |
| | + Requested-Info | | | + Requested-Location-Info |
| | + Basic-Policy-Rules | | | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules |
| | + Extended-Policy-Rules | | | + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules|
| |<-----------------------------| | |<---------------------------------|
| Authentication | | | Authentication | |
| Success | | | Success | |
|<----------------------| | |<----------------------| |
| | | | | |
| | RADIUS |
| | Accounting-Request | | | Accounting-Request |
| | + Location-Information | | | + Location-Information |
| | + Location-Data | | | + Location-Data |
| | + Basic-Policy-Rules | | | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules |
| | + Extended-Policy-Rules | | | + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules|
| |----------------------------->| | |--------------------------------->|
| | | | | |
| | RADIUS |
| | Accounting-Response | | | Accounting-Response |
| |<-----------------------------| | |<---------------------------------|
| | | | | |
Figure 4: Location Delivery in Accounting Messages Figure 5: Location Delivery in Accounting Messages
4. Attributes 4. Attributes
4.1. Operator-Name Attribute 4.1. Operator-Name Attribute
This attribute carries the operator namespace identifier and the This attribute carries the operator namespace identifier and the
operator name. The operator name is combined with the namespace operator name. The operator name is combined with the namespace
identifier to uniquely identify the owner of an access network. The identifier to uniquely identify the owner of an access network. The
value of the Operator-Name is a non-NULL terminated string whose value of the Operator-Name is a non-NULL terminated string whose
length MUST NOT exceed 253 bytes. length MUST NOT exceed 253 bytes.
The Operator-Name attribute SHOULD be sent in Access-Request, and The Operator-Name Attribute SHOULD be sent in Access-Request, and
Accounting-Request messages where the Acc-Status-Type is set to Accounting-Request messages where the Acc-Status-Type is set to
Start, Interim, or Stop. Start, Interim, or Stop.
A summary of the Operator-Name attribute is shown below. A summary of the Operator-Name Attribute is shown below.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | Text ... | Type | Length | Text ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Text (cont.) ... | Text (cont.) ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: Type:
skipping to change at page 14, line 41 skipping to change at page 15, line 41
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Operator-Name ... | Operator-Name ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Namespace ID: Namespace ID:
The value within this field contains the The value within this field contains the
operator namespace identifier. The Namespace ID value operator namespace identifier. The Namespace ID value
is encoded in ASCII. is encoded in ASCII.
Example: 1 for REALM Example: '1' (0x31) for REALM
Operator-Name: Operator-Name:
The text field of variable length contains an The text field of variable length contains an
Access Network Operator Name. Access Network Operator Name.
This field is a RADIUS base data type of Text. This field is a RADIUS base data type of Text.
Example: anyisp.example.com Example: anyisp.example.com
The Namespace ID field provides information about the operator The Namespace ID field provides information about the operator
namespace. This document defines four values for this attribute that namespace. This document defines four values for this attribute that
are listed below. Additional namespace identifiers must be are listed below. Additional namespace identifiers must be
registered with IANA (see Section 8.1) and must be associated with an registered with IANA (see Section 8.1) and must be associated with an
organization responsible for managing the namespace. organization responsible for managing the namespace.
TADIG (0): TADIG ('0' (0x30)):
This namespace can be used to indicate operator names based on This namespace can be used to indicate operator names based on
Transferred Account Data Interchange Group (TADIG) codes defined Transferred Account Data Interchange Group (TADIG) codes defined
in [13]. TADIG codes are assigned by the TADIG Working Group in [GSM]. TADIG codes are assigned by the TADIG Working Group
within the GSM Association. The TADIG Code consists of two within the GSM Association. The TADIG Code consists of two
fields, with a total length of five ASCII characters consisting of fields, with a total length of five ASCII characters consisting of
a three-character country code and a two-character alphanumeric a three-character country code and a two-character alphanumeric
operator (or company) ID. operator (or company) ID.
REALM (1): REALM ('1' (0x31)):
The REALM operator namespace can be used to indicate operator The REALM operator namespace can be used to indicate operator
names based on any registered domain name. Such names are names based on any registered domain name. Such names are
required to be unique and the rights to use a given realm name are required to be unique and the rights to use a given realm name are
obtained coincident with acquiring the rights to use a particular obtained coincident with acquiring the rights to use a particular
Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN). Since this operator is Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN). Since this operator is
limited to ASCII, any registered domain name which contains non- limited to ASCII, any registered domain name which contains non-
ASCII characters must be encoded. To encode a domain name, first ASCII characters must be encoded. To encode a domain name, first
ensure that any non-ASCII characters are in Unicode [14], then ensure that any non-ASCII characters are in Unicode [Unicode],
apply the toAscii operation from RFC 3490 [4] to each label, then then apply the toAscii operation from RFC 3490 [RFC3490] to each
re-assemble the encoded labels into a FQDN. label, then re-assemble the encoded labels into a FQDN.
E212 (2): E212 ('2' (0x32)):
The E212 namespace can be used to indicate operator names based on The E212 namespace can be used to indicate operator names based on
the Mobile Country Code (MCC) and Mobile Network Code (MNC) the Mobile Country Code (MCC) and Mobile Network Code (MNC)
defined in [15]. The MCC/MCC values are assigned by the defined in [ITU212]. The MCC/MCC values are assigned by the
Telecommunications Standardization Bureau (TSB) within the ITU-T Telecommunications Standardization Bureau (TSB) within the ITU-T
and designated administrators in different countries. The E212 and designated administrators in different countries. The E212
value consists of three ASCII digits containing the MCC, followed value consists of three ASCII digits containing the MCC, followed
by two or three ASCII digits containing the MNC. by two or three ASCII digits containing the MNC.
ICC (3): ICC ('3' (0x33)):
The ICC namespace can be used to indicate operator names based on The ICC namespace can be used to indicate operator names based on
International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Carrier Codes (ICC) International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Carrier Codes (ICC)
defined in [16]. ICC values are assigned by national regulatory defined in [ITU1400]. ICC values are assigned by national
authorities and are coordinated by the Telecommunication regulatory authorities and are coordinated by the
Standardization Bureau (TSB) within the ITU Telecommunication Telecommunication Standardization Bureau (TSB) within the ITU
Standardization Sector (ITU-T). When using the ICC namespace, the Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T). When using the
attribute consists of three uppercase ASCII characters containing ICC namespace, the attribute consists of three uppercase ASCII
a three-letter alphabetic country code as defined in [17], characters containing a three-letter alphabetic country code as
followed by one to six uppercase alphanumeric ASCII characters defined in [ISO], followed by one to six uppercase alphanumeric
containing the ICC itself. ASCII characters containing the ICC itself.
4.2. Location-Information Attribute 4.2. Location-Information Attribute
The Location-Information attribute MAY be sent in Access-Request and The Location-Information Attribute MAY be sent in Access-Request and
in Accounting-Request messages. For the Accounting-Request message in Accounting-Request messages. For the Accounting-Request message
the Acc-Status-Type may be set to Start, Interim or Stop. the Acc-Status-Type may be set to Start, Interim or Stop.
The Location-Information attribute provides meta-data about the The Location-Information Attribute provides meta-data about the
location information, such as sighting time, time-to-live, location location information, such as sighting time, time-to-live, location
determination method, etc. Implementations SHOULD treat this determination method, etc. Implementations SHOULD treat this
attribute as undistinguished octets, like the Location-Data attribute attribute as undistinguished octets, like the Location-Data Attribute
to which it refers. to which it refers.
The format is shown below. The format is shown below.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | String ... | Type | Length | String ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| String (cont.) ... | String (cont.) ...
skipping to change at page 17, line 18 skipping to change at page 18, line 18
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Time-to-Live | | Time-to-Live |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Method ... | Method ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Index (16 bits): Index (16 bits):
The 16-bit unsigned integer value allows this attribute The 16-bit unsigned integer value allows this attribute
to provide information relating to the information included to provide information relating to the information included
in the Location-Data attribute to which it refers (via the Index). in the Location-Data Attribute to which it refers (via the Index).
Code: (8 bits): Code: (8 bits):
Describes the location profile that is carried in this attribute Describes the location profile that is carried in this attribute
as an unsigned 8-bit integer value. as an unsigned 8-bit integer value.
Entity (8 bits): Entity (8 bits):
This field encodes which location this attribute refers to as an This field encodes which location this attribute refers to as an
unsigned 8-bit integer value. unsigned 8-bit integer value.
skipping to change at page 18, line 4 skipping to change at page 19, line 4
registry by RFC 4119. The data type of this registry by RFC 4119. The data type of this
field is a string. field is a string.
The following fields need more explanation: The following fields need more explanation:
sighting time: sighting time:
This field indicates when the Location Information was accurate. This field indicates when the Location Information was accurate.
The data type of this field is a string and and the content is The data type of this field is a string and and the content is
expressed in the 64 bit Network Time Protocol (NTP) timestamp expressed in the 64 bit Network Time Protocol (NTP) timestamp
format [18]. format [RFC1305].
time-to-live: time-to-live:
This field gives a hint until when location information should be This field gives a hint until when location information should be
considered current. The data type of this field is a string and considered current. The data type of this field is a string and
the content is expressed in the 64 bit Network Time Protocol (NTP) the content is expressed in the 64 bit Network Time Protocol (NTP)
timestamp format [18]. Note that the time-to-live field is timestamp format [RFC1305]. Note that the time-to-live field is
different than Retention Expires field used in the Basic Policy different than Retention Expires field used in the Basic-Location-
Rules attribute, see Section 4.4. Retention expires indicates the Policy-Rules Attribute, see Section 4.4. Retention expires
time the recipient is no longer permitted to possess the location indicates the time the recipient is no longer permitted to possess
information. the location information.
Entity: Entity:
Location information can refer to different entities. This Location information can refer to different entities. This
document registers two entity values, namely: document registers two entity values, namely:
Value (0) describes the location of the user's client device Value (0) describes the location of the user's client device
Value (1) describes the location of the RADIUS client Value (1) describes the location of the RADIUS client
The registry used for these values is established by this The registry used for these values is established by this
document, see Section 8.4. document, see Section 8.4.
Code: Code:
This field indicates the content of the location profile carried This field indicates the content of the location profile carried
in the Location-Data attribute. Two profiles are defined in this in the Location-Data Attribute. Two profiles are defined in this
document, namely one civic location profile (see Section 4.3.1) document, namely one civic location profile (see Section 4.3.1)
that uses value (0) and a geospatial location profile (see that uses value (0) and a geospatial location profile (see
Section 4.3.2) that uses the value (1). Section 4.3.2) that uses the value (1).
The length of the Location-Information Attribute MUST NOT exceed 253 The length of the Location-Information Attribute MUST NOT exceed 253
octets. octets.
4.3. Location Data Attribute 4.3. Location-Data Attribute
The Location-Data attribute MAY be sent in Access-Request and in The Location-Data Attribute MAY be sent in Access-Request and in
Accounting-Request messages. For the Accounting-Request message the Accounting-Request messages. For the Accounting-Request message the
Acc-Status-Type may be set to Start, Interim or Stop. Acc-Status-Type may be set to Start, Interim or Stop.
Implementations SHOULD treat this attribute as undistinguished Implementations SHOULD treat this attribute as undistinguished
octets. octets.
The format is shown below. The format is shown below.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
skipping to change at page 19, line 25 skipping to change at page 20, line 25
Type: Type:
To Be Assigned by IANA - Location-Data To Be Assigned by IANA - Location-Data
Length: Length:
>= 21 >= 21
String: String:
Thhis field is at least two octets in length, and the format This field is at least two octets in length, and the format
is shown below. The data type of this field is string. is shown below. The data type of this field is string.
All fields are transmitted from left to right: All fields are transmitted from left to right:
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Index | Location ... | Index | Location ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Location ... | Location ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Index (16 bits): Index (16 bits):
The 16-bit unsigned integer value allows to associate The 16-bit unsigned integer value allows to associate
the Location-Data attribute with the the Location-Data Attribute with the
Location-Information attributes. Location-Information Attributes.
Location (variable): Location (variable):
The format of the location data depends on the location The format of the location data depends on the location
profile. This document defines two location profiles. profile. This document defines two location profiles.
Details of the location profiles is described below. Details of the location profiles is described below.
4.3.1. Civic Location Profile 4.3.1. Civic Location Profile
Civic location is a popular way to describe the location of an Civic location is a popular way to describe the location of an
entity. This section defines the civic location information profile entity. This section defines the civic location information profile
corresponding to the value (0) indicated in the Code field of the corresponding to the value (0) indicated in the Code field of the
Location-Information attribute. The location format is based on the Location-Information Attribute. The location format is based on the
encoding format defined in Section 3.1 of [5] whereby the first 3 encoding format defined in Section 3.1 of [RFC4776] whereby the first
octets (i.e., the code for this DHCP option, the length of the DHCP 3 octets (i.e., the code for this DHCP option, the length of the DHCP
option, and the 'what' element are not included) are not put into the option, and the 'what' element are not included) are not put into the
Location field of the above-described RADIUS Location-Data attribute. Location field of the above-described RADIUS Location-Data Attribute.
4.3.2. Geospatial Location Profile 4.3.2. Geospatial Location Profile
This section defines the geospatial location information profile This section defines the geospatial location information profile
corresponding to the value (1) indicated in the Code field of the corresponding to the value (1) indicated in the Code field of the
Location-Information attribute. Geospatial location information is Location-Information Attribute. Geospatial location information is
encoded as an opaque object whereby the format is reused from the encoded as an opaque object whereby the format is reused from the
Section 2 of RFC 3825 Location Configuration Information (LCI) format Section 2 of RFC 3825 Location Configuration Information (LCI) format
[6]. starting with starting with the third octet (i.e., the code for [RFC3825]. starting with starting with the third octet (i.e., the
the DHCP option and the length field is not included). code for the DHCP option and the length field is not included).
4.4. Basic Policy Rules Attribute 4.4. Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute
The Basic-Policy-Rules attribute MAY be sent in an an Access-Request, The Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute MAY be sent in an Access-
Access-Accept, an Access-Challenge, an Access-Reject and an Request, Access-Accept, an Access-Challenge, an Access-Reject, a
Accounting-Request message. Change-of-Authorization and in an Accounting-Request message.
Policy rules control the distribution of location information. The Policy rules control the distribution of location information. The
obligation with respect to understanding and processing of the Basic obligation with respect to understanding and processing of the Basic-
Policy Rules attribute for RADIUS clients is to utilize a default Location-Policy-Rules Attribute for RADIUS clients is to utilize a
value of Basic-Policy-Rules unless explicitly configured otherwise, default value of Basic-Location-Policy-Rules unless explicitly
and also for clients to echo the Basic-Policy-Rules attribute that configured otherwise, and also for clients to echo the Basic-
they receive from a server. As a default, the note-well field does Location-Policy-Rules Attribute that they receive from a server. As
not carry a pointer to human readable privacy policies, the a default, the note-well field does not carry a pointer to human
retransmission-allowed is set to zero (0), i.e., further distribution readable privacy policies, the retransmission-allowed is set to zero
is not allowed, and the retention-expires field is set to 24 hours. (0), i.e., further distribution is not allowed, and the retention-
expires field is set to 24 hours.
With regard to authorization policies this document reuses work done With regard to authorization policies this document reuses work done
in [19] and encodes them in a non-XML format. Two fields ('sighting in [RFC4119] and encodes them in a non-XML format. Two fields
time' and 'time-to-live') are additionally included in the Location- ('sighting time' and 'time-to-live') are additionally included in the
Information attribute to conform to the GEOPRIV requirements [10], Location-Information Attribute to conform to the GEOPRIV requirements
Section 2.7. [RFC3693], Section 2.7.
The format of the Basic-Policy-Rules attribute is shown below. The format of the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute is shown
below.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | String ... | Type | Length | String ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| String (cont.) ... | String (cont.) ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: Type:
To Be Assigned by IANA - Basic-Policy-Rules To Be Assigned by IANA - Basic-Location-Policy-Rules
Length: Length:
>= 12 >= 12
String: String:
This field is at least 8 octets in length, and the format This field is at least 8 octets in length, and the format
is shown below. The data type of this field is string. is shown below. The data type of this field is string.
All fields are transmitted from left to right: All fields are transmitted from left to right:
skipping to change at page 22, line 12 skipping to change at page 23, line 14
Retention Expires (64 bits): Retention Expires (64 bits):
NTP timestamp for the 'retention-expires' field. NTP timestamp for the 'retention-expires' field.
Note Well (variable): Note Well (variable):
This field contains a URI that points to human readable This field contains a URI that points to human readable
privacy instructions. The data type of this field is string. privacy instructions. The data type of this field is string.
This document reuses fields of the RFC 4119 [19] 'usage-rules' This document reuses fields of the RFC 4119 [RFC4119] 'usage-rules'
element. These fields have the following meaning: element. These fields have the following meaning:
retransmission-allowed: retransmission-allowed:
When the value of this field is to zero (0), then the recipient of When the value of this field is to zero (0), then the recipient of
this Location Object is not permitted to share the enclosed this Location Object is not permitted to share the enclosed
location information, or the object as a whole, with other location information, or the object as a whole, with other
parties. The value of '1' allows to share the location parties. The value of '1' allows to share the location
information with other parties by considering the extended policy information with other parties by considering the extended policy
rules. rules.
retention-expires: retention-expires:
This field specifies an absolute date at which time the Recipient This field specifies an absolute date at which time the Recipient
is no longer permitted to possess the location information. The is no longer permitted to possess the location information. The
data type of this field is a string and the format is a 64 bit NTP data type of this field is a string and the format is a 64 bit NTP
timestamp [18]. timestamp [RFC1305].
note-well: note-well:
This field contains a URI that points to human readable privacy This field contains a URI that points to human readable privacy
instructions. This field is useful when location information is instructions. This field is useful when location information is
distributed to third party entities, which can include humans in a distributed to third party entities, which can include humans in a
location based service. RADIUS entities are not supposed to location based service. RADIUS entities are not supposed to
process this field. process this field.
Whenever a Location Object leaves the RADIUS eco-system the URI in Whenever a Location Object leaves the RADIUS eco-system the URI in
the note-well attribute MUST be expanded to the human readable the note-well attribute MUST be expanded to the human readable
text. For example, when the Location Object is transferred to a text. For example, when the Location Object is transferred to a
SIP based environment then the human readable text is placed into SIP based environment then the human readable text is placed into
the 'note-well' element of the 'usage-rules' element contained in the 'note-well' element of the 'usage-rules' element contained in
the PIDF-LO document (see [19]). the PIDF-LO document (see [RFC4119]).
4.5. Extended Policy Rules Attribute 4.5. Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute
The Extended-Policy-Rules attribute MAY be sent in an Access-Request, The Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute MAY be sent in an
an Access-Accept, an Access-Challenge, an Access-Reject and in an Access-Request, an Access-Accept, an Access-Challenge, an Access-
Accounting-Request message whenever location information is Reject, an Change-of-Authorization and in an Accounting-Request
transmitted. message.
The ruleset reference field of this attribute is of variable length. The ruleset reference field of this attribute is of variable length.
It contains a URI that indicates where the richer ruleset can be It contains a URI that indicates where the richer ruleset can be
found. This URI SHOULD use the HTTPS URI scheme. As a deviation found. This URI SHOULD use the HTTPS URI scheme. As a deviation
from [19] this field only contains a reference and does not carry an from [RFC4119] this field only contains a reference and does not
attached extended rule set. This modification is motivated by the carry an attached extended rule set. This modification is motivated
size limitations imposed by RADIUS. by the size limitations imposed by RADIUS.
Policy rules control the distribution of location information and, as Policy rules control the distribution of location information and, as
with the Basic Policy Rules attribute the obligation with respect to with the Basic Policy Rules Attribute the obligation with respect to
understanding and processing of the Extended Policy Rules attribute understanding and processing of the Extended-Location-Policy-Rules
for RADIUS clients is when they are explicitly configured to attach Attribute for RADIUS clients is when they are explicitly configured
the URI, and also for clients to echo the Extended-Policy-Rules to attach the URI, and also for clients to echo the Extended-
attribute that they receive from a server. There is no expectation Location-Policy-Rules Attribute that they receive from a server.
that RADIUS clients will need to retrieve data at the URL specified There is no expectation that RADIUS clients will need to retrieve
in the attribute and to parse the XML policies. data at the URL specified in the attribute and to parse the XML
policies.
The format of the Extended-Policy-Rules attribute is shown below. The format of the Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute is shown
below.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | String ... | Type | Length | String ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| String (cont.) ... | String (cont.) ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: Type:
To Be Assigned by IANA - Extended-Policy-Rules To Be Assigned by IANA - Extended-Location-Policy-Rules
Length: Length:
>= 4 >= 4
String: String:
This field is at least two octets in length, and the format This field is at least two octets in length, and the format
is shown below. The data type of this field is string. is shown below. The data type of this field is string.
The fields are transmitted from left to right: The fields are transmitted from left to right:
skipping to change at page 24, line 39 skipping to change at page 25, line 39
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Ruleset Reference ... | Ruleset Reference ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Ruleset Reference: Ruleset Reference:
This field contains a URI that points to the policy rules. This field contains a URI that points to the policy rules.
4.6. Location-Capable Attribute 4.6. Location-Capable Attribute
The Location-Capable attribute allows a NAS (or client function of a The Location-Capable Attribute allows a NAS (or client function of a
proxy server) to indicate support for the functionality specified in proxy server) to indicate support for the functionality specified in
this document. The Location-Capable attribute with the value for this document. The Location-Capable Attribute with the value for
'Location Capable' MUST be sent with the Access-Request messages, if 'Location Capable' MUST be sent with the Access-Request messages, if
the NAS supports the functionality described in this document and is the NAS supports the functionality described in this document and is
capable of sending location information. A RADIUS server SHOULD NOT capable of sending location information. A RADIUS server SHOULD NOT
challenge for location information unless the Location-Capable challenge for location information unless the Location-Capable
attribute has been sent to it. Attribute has been sent to it.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | Integer | | Type | Length | Integer |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Integer (cont.) | | Integer (cont.) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: Type:
skipping to change at page 25, line 33 skipping to change at page 26, line 33
This field is a 32-bit integer value. This field is a 32-bit integer value.
Only a single value is defined for this field: Only a single value is defined for this field:
Value | Semantic Value | Semantic
----------+----------------- ----------+-----------------
1 | Location Capable 1 | Location Capable
Other bit positions are available via IANA Other bit positions are available via IANA
registration. registration.
4.7. Requested-Info Attribute 4.7. Requested-Location-Info Attribute
The Requested-Info attribute allows the RADIUS server to indicate The Requested-Location-Info Attribute allows the RADIUS server to
what location information about which entity it wants to receive. indicate what location information about which entity it wants to
The latter aspect refers to the entities that are indicated in the receive. The latter aspect refers to the entities that are indicated
Entity field of the Location-Information attribute. in the Entity field of the Location-Information Attribute.
The Requested-Info attribute MAY be sent in an an Access-Accept or in The Requested-Location-Info Attribute MAY be sent in an Access-
an Access-Challenge packet. Accept, in an Access-Challenge, or a Change of Authorization packet.
If the RADIUS server wants to dynamically decide on a per-request If the RADIUS server wants to dynamically decide on a per-request
basis to ask for location information from the RADIUS client then the basis to ask for location information from the RADIUS client then the
following cases need to be differentiated. If the RADIUS client and following cases need to be differentiated. If the RADIUS client and
the RADIUS server have agreed out-of-band to mandate the transfer of the RADIUS server have agreed out-of-band to mandate the transfer of
location information for every network access authentication request location information for every network access authentication request
then the processing listed below is not applicable. then the processing listed below is not applicable.
o If the RADIUS server requires location information for computing o If the RADIUS server requires location information for computing
the authorization decision and the RADIUS client does not provide the authorization decision and the RADIUS client does not provide
it with the Access-Request message then the Requested-Info it with the Access-Request message then the Requested-Location-
attribute is attached to the Access-Challenge with a hint about Info Attribute is attached to the Access-Challenge with a hint
what is required. Two cases can be differentiated: about what is required. Two cases can be differentiated:
1. If the RADIUS client sends the requested information then the 1. If the RADIUS client sends the requested information then the
RADIUS server can process the location-based attributes. RADIUS server can process the location-based attributes.
2. If the RADIUS server does not receive the requested 2. If the RADIUS server does not receive the requested
information in response to the Access-Challenge (including the information in response to the Access-Challenge (including the
Requested-Info attribute) then the RADIUS server may respond Requested-Location-Info Attribute) then the RADIUS server may
with an Access-Reject message with an Error-Cause attribute respond with an Access-Reject message with an Error-Cause
(including the "Location-Info-Required" value). Attribute (including the "Location-Info-Required" value).
o If the RADIUS server would like location information in the o If the RADIUS server would like location information in the
Accounting-Request message but does not require it for computing Accounting-Request message but does not require it for computing
an authorization decision then the Access-Accept message MUST an authorization decision then the Access-Accept message MUST
include a Required-Info attribute. This is typically the case include a Required-Info Attribute. This is typically the case
when location information is used only for billing. The RADIUS when location information is used only for billing. The RADIUS
client SHOULD attach location information, if available, to the client SHOULD attach location information, if available, to the
Accounting-Request (unless authorization policies dictate Accounting-Request (unless authorization policies dictate
something different). something different).
If the RADIUS server does not send a Requested-Info attribute then If the RADIUS server does not send a Requested-Location-Info
the RADIUS client MUST NOT attach location information to messages Attribute then the RADIUS client MUST NOT attach location information
towards the RADIUS server, unless an out-of-band agreement is in to messages towards the RADIUS server, unless an out-of-band
place. The user's authorization policies, if available, MUST be agreement is in place. The user's authorization policies, if
consulted by the RADIUS server before requesting location information available, MUST be consulted by the RADIUS server before requesting
delivery from the RADIUS client. location information delivery from the RADIUS client.
Figure 11 shows a simple protocol exchange where the RADIUS server Figure 12 shows a simple protocol exchange where the RADIUS server
indicates the desire to obtain location information, namely civic indicates the desire to obtain location information, namely civic
location information of the user, to grant access. Since the location information of the user, to grant access. Since the
Requested-Info attribute is attached to the Access-Challenge the Requested-Location-Info Attribute is attached to the Access-Challenge
RADIUS server indicates that location information is required for the RADIUS server indicates that location information is required for
computing an authorization decision. computing an authorization decision.
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
| RADIUS | | RADIUS | | RADIUS | | RADIUS |
| Client | | Server | | Client | | Server |
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
| | | |
| | | |
| RADIUS |
| Access-Request | | Access-Request |
| + Location-Capable | | + Location-Capable |
|----------------------------->| |--------------------------------->|
| | | |
| RADIUS |
| Access-Challenge | | Access-Challenge |
| + Requested-Info | | + Requested-Location-Info |
| ('CIVIC_LOCATION', | | ('CIVIC_LOCATION', |
| 'USERS_LOCATION') | | 'USERS_LOCATION') |
| + Basic-Policy-Rules | | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules |
| + Extended-Policy-Rules | | + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules |
|<-----------------------------| |<---------------------------------|
| | | |
| RADIUS |
| Access-Request | | Access-Request |
| + Location-Information | | + Location-Information |
| + Location-Data | | + Location-Data |
| + Basic-Policy-Rules | | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules |
| + Extended-Policy-Rules | | + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules |
|----------------------------->| |--------------------------------->|
| | | |
| .... | | .... |
Figure 11: RADIUS server requesting location information Figure 12: RADIUS server requesting location information
The Requested-Info attribute MUST be sent by the RADIUS server, in The Requested-Location-Info Attribute MUST be sent by the RADIUS
the absence of an out-of-band agreement, if it wants the RADIUS server, in the absence of an out-of-band agreement, if it wants the
client to return location information and if authorization policies RADIUS client to return location information and if authorization
permit it. This Requested-Info attribute MAY appear in the Access- policies permit it. This Requested-Location-Info Attribute MAY
Accept or in the Access-Challenge message. appear in the Access-Accept or in the Access-Challenge message.
A summary of the attribute is shown below. A summary of the attribute is shown below.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | Integer ... | Type | Length | Integer ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Integer (cont.) | | Integer (cont.) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: Type:
To Be Assigned by IANA - Requested-Info Attribute To Be Assigned by IANA - Requested-Location-Info Attribute
Length: Length:
6 6
Integer: Integer:
The content of the Integer field encodes the The content of the Integer field encodes the
requested information attributes. requested information attributes.
Each capability value represents a bit position. Each capability value represents a bit position.
This document specifies the following capabilities: This document specifies the following capabilities:
Name: Name:
CIVIC_LOCATION CIVIC_LOCATION
Description: Description:
The RADIUS server uses this attribute to request information from The RADIUS server uses the Requested-Location-Info Attribute with
the RADIUS client to be returned. The numerical value the value set to CIVIC_LOCATION to request specific location
information from the RADIUS client. The numerical value
representing CIVIC_LOCATION requires the RADIUS client to attach representing CIVIC_LOCATION requires the RADIUS client to attach
civic location attributes. CIVIC_LOCATION refers to the location civic location attributes. CIVIC_LOCATION refers to the location
profile defined in Section 4.3.1. profile defined in Section 4.3.1.
Numerical Value: Numerical Value:
A numerical value of this attribute is '1'. A numerical value of this token is '1'.
Name: Name:
GEO_LOCATION GEO_LOCATION
Description: Description:
The RADIUS server uses this attribute to request information from The RADIUS server uses the Requested-Location-Info Attribute with
the RADIUS client to be returned. The numerical value the value set to GEO_LOCATION to request specific location
information from the RADIUS client. The numerical value
representing GEO_LOCATION requires the RADIUS client to attach representing GEO_LOCATION requires the RADIUS client to attach
geospatial location attributes. GEO_LOCATION refers to the geospatial location attributes. GEO_LOCATION refers to the
location profile described in Section 4.3.2. location profile described in Section 4.3.2.
Numerical Value: Numerical Value:
A numerical value of this attribute is '2'. A numerical value of this token is '2'.
Name: Name:
USERS_LOCATION USERS_LOCATION
Description: Description:
The numerical value representing USERS_LOCATION indicates that the The numerical value representing USERS_LOCATION indicates that the
RADIUS client must sent a Location-Information attribute with the RADIUS client MUST sent a Location-Information attribute with the
Entity attribute expressing the value of zero (0). Hence, there Entity attribute expressing the value of zero (0). Hence, there
is a one-to-one relationship between USERS_LOCATION token and the is a one-to-one relationship between USERS_LOCATION token and the
value of zero (0) of the Entity attribute inside the Location- value of zero (0) of the Entity attribute inside the Location-
Information attribute. A value of zero indicates that the Information attribute. A value of zero indicates that the
location information in the Location-Information attribute refers location information in the Location-Information attribute refers
to the user's client device. to the user's client device.
Numerical Value: Numerical Value:
A numerical value of this attribute is '4'. A numerical value of this token is '4'.
Name: Name:
NAS_LOCATION NAS_LOCATION
Description: Description:
The numerical value representing NAS_LOCATION indicates that the The numerical value representing NAS_LOCATION indicates that the
RADIUS client must sent a Location-Information attribute that RADIUS client MUST sent a Location-Information attribute that
contains location information with the Entity attribute expressing contains location information with the Entity attribute expressing
the value of one (1). Hence, there is a one-to-one relationship the value of one (1). Hence, there is a one-to-one relationship
between NAS_LOCATION token and the value of one (1) of the Entity between NAS_LOCATION token and the value of one (1) of the Entity
attribute inside the Location-Information attribute. A value of attribute inside the Location-Information attribute. A value of
one indicates that the location information in the Location- one indicates that the location information in the Location-
Information attribute refers to the RADIUS client. Information attribute refers to the RADIUS client.
Numerical Value: Numerical Value:
A numerical value of this attribute is '8'. A numerical value of this token is '8'.
Name: Name:
FUTURE_REQUESTS FUTURE_REQUESTS
Description: Description:
The numerical value representing FUTURE_REQUESTS indicates that The numerical value representing FUTURE_REQUESTS indicates that
the RADIUS client MUST provide future Access-Requests with the the RADIUS client MUST provide future Access-Requests with the
same information as returned in the initial Access-Request same information as returned in the initial Access-Request
message. message.
Numerical Value: Numerical Value:
A numerical value of this attribute is '16'. A numerical value of this token is '16'.
Name:
NONE
Description:
The RADIUS server uses this token to request that the RADIUS
client stops sending location information.
Numerical Value:
A numerical value of this token is '32'.
If neither the NAS_LOCATION nor the USERS_LOCATION bit is set then If neither the NAS_LOCATION nor the USERS_LOCATION bit is set then
per-default the location of the user's client device is returned (if per-default the location of the user's client device is returned (if
authorization policies allow it). If both the NAS_LOCATION and the authorization policies allow it). If both the NAS_LOCATION and the
USERS_LOCATION bits are set then the returned location information USERS_LOCATION bits are set then the returned location information
has to be put into separate attributes. If neither the has to be put into separate attributes. If neither the
CIVIC_LOCATION nor the GEO_LOCATION bit is set in the Requested-Info CIVIC_LOCATION nor the GEO_LOCATION bit is set in the Requested-
attribute then no location information is returned. If both the Location-Info Attribute then no location information is returned. If
CIVIC_LOCATION and the GEO_LOCATION bits are set then the location both the CIVIC_LOCATION and the GEO_LOCATION bits are set then the
information has to be put into separate attributes. The value of location information has to be put into separate attributes. The
NAS_LOCATION and USERS_LOCATION refers to the location information value of NAS_LOCATION and USERS_LOCATION refers to the location
requested via CIVIC_LOCATION and via GEO_LOCATION. information requested via CIVIC_LOCATION and via GEO_LOCATION.
As an example, if the bits for NAS_LOCATION, USERS_LOCATION and As an example, if the bits for NAS_LOCATION, USERS_LOCATION and
GEO_LOCATION are set then location information of the RADIUS client GEO_LOCATION are set then location information of the RADIUS client
and the users' client device are returned in a geospatial location and the users' client device are returned in a geospatial location
format. format.
5. Table of Attributes 5. Table of Attributes
The following table provides a guide which attributes may be found in The following table provides a guide which attributes may be found in
which RADIUS messages, and in what quantity. which RADIUS messages, and in what quantity.
Request Accept Reject Challenge Accounting # Attribute Request Accept Reject Challenge Accounting # Attribute
Request Request
0-1 0 0 0 0-1 TBD Operator-Name 0-1 0 0 0 0-1 TBD Operator-Name
0+ 0 0 0 0+ TBD Location-Information 0+ 0 0 0 0+ TBD Location-Information
0+ 0 0 0 0+ TBD Location-Data 0+ 0 0 0 0+ TBD Location-Data
0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 TBD Basic-Policy-Rules 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 TBD Basic-Location-
0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 TBD Extended-Policy-Rules Policy-Rules
0 0-1 0 0-1 0 TBD Requested-Info 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 TBD Extended-Location-
Policy-Rules
0 0-1 0 0-1 0 TBD Requested-Location-Info
0-1 0 0 0 0 TBD Location-Capable 0-1 0 0 0 0 TBD Location-Capable
0 0 0-1 0 0 101 Error-Cause [note1] 0 0 0-1 0 0 101 Error-Cause [note1]
[note1] The Error-Cause attribute contains the value for the [note1] The Error-Cause attribute contains the value for the
'Location-Info-Required' error. 'Location-Info-Required' error.
The following table defines the meaning of the above table entries. Change-of-Authorization Messages
Request ACK NAK # Attribute
0-1 0 0 TBD Basic-Location-Policy-Rules
0-1 0 0 TBD Extended-Location-Policy-Rules
0-1 0 0 TBD Requested-Location-Info
Legend:
0 This attribute MUST NOT be present. 0 This attribute MUST NOT be present.
0+ Zero or more instances of this attribute MAY be present. 0+ Zero or more instances of this attribute MAY be present.
0-1 Zero or one instance of this attribute MAY be present. 0-1 Zero or one instance of this attribute MAY be present.
1 Exactly one instance of this attribute MUST be present. 1 Exactly one instance of this attribute MUST be present.
1+ One or more of these attributes MUST be present. 1+ One or more of these attributes MUST be present.
Figure 13: Table of Attributes Figure 14: Table of Attributes
The Error-Cause attribute is defined in [3]. The Error-Cause Attribute is defined in [RFC3576].
The Location-Information and the Location-Data attribute MAY appear The Location-Information and the Location-Data Attribute MAY appear
more than once. For example, if the server asks for civic and more than once. For example, if the server asks for civic and
geospatial location information two Location-Information attributes geospatial location information two Location-Information Attributes
need to be sent. need to be sent.
The attributes defined in this document are not used in any messages The attributes defined in this document are not used in any messages
other than the onces listed in Figure 13. other than the onces listed in Figure 14.
This document requests IANA to allocate a new value from the Error- This document requests IANA to allocate a new value from the Error-
Cause registry with the semantic of 'Location-Info-Required'. Cause registry with the semantic of 'Location-Info-Required'.
6. Diameter RADIUS Interoperability 6. Diameter RADIUS Interoperability
When used in Diameter, the attributes defined in this specification When used in Diameter, the attributes defined in this specification
can be used as Diameter AVPs from the Code space 1-255 (RADIUS can be used as Diameter AVPs from the Code space 1-255 (RADIUS
attribute compatibility space). No additional Diameter Code values attribute compatibility space). No additional Diameter Code values
are therefore allocated. The data types and flag rules for the are therefore allocated. The data types and flag rules for the
skipping to change at page 33, line 22 skipping to change at page 35, line 22
+---------------------+ +---------------------+
| AVP Flag rules | | AVP Flag rules |
|----+-----+----+-----|----+ |----+-----+----+-----|----+
| | |SHLD| MUST| | | | |SHLD| MUST| |
Attribute Name Value Type |MUST| MAY | NOT| NOT|Encr| Attribute Name Value Type |MUST| MAY | NOT| NOT|Encr|
----------------------------------|----+-----+----+-----|----| ----------------------------------|----+-----+----+-----|----|
Operator-Name OctetString| | P,M | | V | Y | Operator-Name OctetString| | P,M | | V | Y |
Location-Information OctetString| M | P | | V | Y | Location-Information OctetString| M | P | | V | Y |
Location-Data OctetString| M | P | | V | Y | Location-Data OctetString| M | P | | V | Y |
Basic-Policy-Rules OctetString| M | P | | V | Y | Basic-Location- | | | | | |
Extended-Policy-Rules OctetString| M | P | | V | Y | Policy-Rules OctetString| M | P | | V | Y |
Requested-Info OctetString| M | P | | V | Y | Extended-Location- | | | | | |
Policy-Rules OctetString| M | P | | V | Y |
Requested- | | | | | |
Location-Info OctetString| M | P | | V | Y |
Location-Capable OctetString| | P,M | | V | Y | Location-Capable OctetString| | P,M | | V | Y |
----------------------------------|----+-----+----+-----|----| ----------------------------------|----+-----+----+-----|----|
The attributes in this specification have no special translation The attributes in this specification have no special translation
requirements for Diameter to RADIUS or RADIUS to Diameter gateways; requirements for Diameter to RADIUS or RADIUS to Diameter gateways;
they are copied as is, except for changes relating to headers, they are copied as is, except for changes relating to headers,
alignment, and padding. See also Section 4.1 of [7] and Section 9 of alignment, and padding. See also Section 4.1 of [RFC3588] and
[20]. Section 9 of [RFC4005].
What this specification says about the applicability of the What this specification says about the applicability of the
attributes for RADIUS Access-Request packets applies in Diameter to attributes for RADIUS Access-Request packets applies in Diameter to
AA-Request [20] or Diameter-EAP-Request [21]. What is said about AA-Request [RFC4005] or Diameter-EAP-Request [RFC4072]. What is said
Access-Challenge applies in Diameter to AA-Answer [20] or Diameter- about Access-Challenge applies in Diameter to AA-Answer [RFC4005] or
EAP-Answer [21] with Result-Code AVP set to Diameter-EAP-Answer [RFC4072] with Result-Code AVP set to
DIAMETER_MULTI_ROUND_AUTH. What is said about Access-Accept applies DIAMETER_MULTI_ROUND_AUTH. What is said about Access-Accept applies
in Diameter to AA-Answer or Diameter-EAP-Answer messages that in Diameter to AA-Answer or Diameter-EAP-Answer messages that
indicate success. Similarly, what is said about RADIUS Access-Reject indicate success. Similarly, what is said about RADIUS Access-Reject
packets applies in Diameter to AA-Answer or Diameter-EAP-Answer packets applies in Diameter to AA-Answer or Diameter-EAP-Answer
messages that indicate failure. messages that indicate failure.
What is said about COA-Request applies in Diameter to Re-Auth-Request What is said about CoA-Request applies in Diameter to Re-Auth-Request
[20]. [RFC4005].
What is said about Accounting-Request applies to Diameter Accounting- What is said about Accounting-Request applies to Diameter Accounting-
Request [20] as well. Request [RFC4005] as well.
7. Security Considerations 7. Security Considerations
A number of security aspects are relevant for the distribution of A number of security aspects are relevant for the distribution of
location information via RADIUS. These aspects are discussed in location information via RADIUS. These aspects are discussed in
separate sub-sections. separate sub-sections.
7.1. Communication Security 7.1. Communication Security
Requirements for the protection of a Location Object are defined in Requirements for the protection of a Location Object are defined in
[10], namely mutual end-point authentication, data object integrity, [RFC3693], namely mutual end-point authentication, data object
data object confidentiality and replay protection. integrity, data object confidentiality and replay protection.
If no authentication, integrity and replay protection between the If no authentication, integrity and replay protection between the
participating RADIUS entities is provided then adversaries can spoof participating RADIUS entities is provided then adversaries can spoof
and modify transmitted attributes. Two security mechanisms are and modify transmitted attributes. Two security mechanisms are
proposed for RADIUS: proposed for RADIUS:
o [2] proposes the usage of a static key that raised concerns o [RFC2865] proposes the usage of a static key that raised concerns
regarding the lack dynamic key management. At the time of regarding the lack dynamic key management. At the time of
writing, work is ongoing to address some shortcomings of [2] writing, work is ongoing to address some shortcomings of [RFC2865]
attribute security protection. attribute security protection.
o RADIUS over IPsec [22] enables the use of standard key management o RADIUS over IPsec [RFC3579] enables the use of standard key
mechanisms, such as KINK, IKE and IKEv2 [23], to establish IPsec management mechanisms, such as KINK, IKE and IKEv2 [RFC4306], to
security associations. Confidentiality protection MUST be used to establish IPsec security associations. Confidentiality protection
prevent eavesdropper gaining access to location information. MUST be used to prevent eavesdropper gaining access to location
Confidentiality protection is not only a property required by this information. Confidentiality protection is not only a property
document, it is also required for the transport of keying material required by this document, it is also required for the transport
in the context of EAP authentication and authorization. Hence, of keying material in the context of EAP authentication and
this requirement is, in many environments, already fulfilled. authorization. Hence, this requirement is, in many environments,
Mutual authentication MUST be provided between neighboring RADIUS already fulfilled. Mutual authentication MUST be provided between
entities to prevent man-in-the-middle attacks. Since mutual neighboring RADIUS entities to prevent man-in-the-middle attacks.
authentication is already required for key transport within RADIUS Since mutual authentication is already required for key transport
messages it does not represent a deployment obstacle. Since IPsec within RADIUS messages it does not represent a deployment
protection is suggested as a mechanism to protect RADIUS already obstacle. Since IPsec protection is suggested as a mechanism to
no additional considerations need to be addressed beyond those protect RADIUS already no additional considerations need to be
described in [22]. addressed beyond those described in [RFC3579].
In case that IPsec protection is not available for some reason and In case that IPsec protection is not available for some reason and
RADIUS specific security mechanisms have to be used then the RADIUS specific security mechanisms have to be used then the
following considerations apply. The Access-Request message is not following considerations apply. The Access-Request message is not
integrity protected. This would allow an adversary to change the integrity protected. This would allow an adversary to change the
contents of the Location Object or to insert, modify and delete contents of the Location Object or to insert, modify and delete
attributes or individual fields. To address these problems the attributes or individual fields. To address these problems the
Message-Authenticator (80) can be used to integrity protect the Message-Authenticator (80) can be used to integrity protect the
entire Access-Request packet. The Message-Authenticator (80) is also entire Access-Request packet. The Message-Authenticator (80) is also
required when EAP is used and hence is supported by many modern required when EAP is used and hence is supported by many modern
RADIUS servers. RADIUS servers.
Access-Request packets including Location attribute(s) without a Access-Request packets including location attribute(s) without a
Message-Authenticator(80) attribute SHOULD be silently discarded by Message-Authenticator(80) Attribute SHOULD be silently discarded by
the RADIUS server. A RADIUS server supporting location attributes the RADIUS server. A RADIUS server supporting location attributes
MUST calculate the correct value of the Message-Authenticator(80) and MUST calculate the correct value of the Message-Authenticator(80) and
MUST silently discard the packet if it does not match the value sent. MUST silently discard the packet if it does not match the value sent.
Access-Accept, including Location attribute(s) without a Message- Access-Accept, including location attribute(s) without a Message-
Authenticator(80) attribute SHOULD be silently discarded by the NAS. Authenticator(80) Attribute SHOULD be silently discarded by the NAS.
A NAS supporting location attributes MUST calculate the correct value A NAS supporting location attributes MUST calculate the correct value
of a received Message-Authenticator(80) and MUST silently discard the of a received Message-Authenticator(80) and MUST silently discard the
packet if it does not match the value sent. packet if it does not match the value sent.
RADIUS and Diameter make some assumptions about the trust between RADIUS and Diameter make some assumptions about the trust between
traversed RADIUS entities in the sense that object level security is traversed RADIUS entities in the sense that object level security is
not provided by neither RADIUS nor Diameter. Hence, some trust has not provided by neither RADIUS nor Diameter. Hence, some trust has
to be placed on the RADIUS entities to behave according to the to be placed on the RADIUS entities to behave according to the
defined rules. Furthermore, the RADIUS protocol does not involve the defined rules. Furthermore, the RADIUS protocol does not involve the
user in their protocol interaction except for tunneling user in their protocol interaction except for tunneling
authentication information (such as EAP messages) through their authentication information (such as EAP messages) through their
infrastructure. RADIUS and Diameter have even become a de-facto infrastructure. RADIUS and Diameter have even become a de-facto
protocol for key distribution for network access authentication protocol for key distribution for network access authentication
applications. Hence, in the past there were some concerns about the applications. Hence, in the past there were some concerns about the
trust placed into the infrastructure particularly from the security trust placed into the infrastructure particularly from the security
area when it comes to keying. The EAP keying infrastructure is area when it comes to keying. The EAP keying infrastructure is
described in [24]. described in [RFC4282].
7.2. Privacy Considerations 7.2. Privacy Considerations
This section discusses privacy implications for the distribution of This section discusses privacy implications for the distribution of
location information within RADIUS. Note also that it is possible location information within RADIUS. Note also that it is possible
for the RADIUS server to obtain some amount of location information for the RADIUS server to obtain some amount of location information
from the NAS identifier. This document, however, describes from the NAS identifier. This document, however, describes
procedures to convey more accurate location information about the end procedures to convey more accurate location information about the end
host and/or the network. In a number of deployment environments host and/or the network. In a number of deployment environments
location information about the network also reveals the current location information about the network also reveals the current
skipping to change at page 36, line 22 skipping to change at page 39, line 22
o If neither an out-of-band agreement exists nor location o If neither an out-of-band agreement exists nor location
information is requested by the RADIUS server then location information is requested by the RADIUS server then location
information is not disclosed by the RADIUS client. information is not disclosed by the RADIUS client.
o The RADIUS client MUST pass location information to other entities o The RADIUS client MUST pass location information to other entities
(e.g., when information is written to a local database or to the (e.g., when information is written to a local database or to the
log files) only together with the policy rules. The entity log files) only together with the policy rules. The entity
receiving the location information (together with the policies) receiving the location information (together with the policies)
MUST follow the guidance given with these rules. MUST follow the guidance given with these rules.
o A RADIUS client MUST include Basic-Policy-Rules and Extended- o A RADIUS client MUST include Basic-Location-Policy-Rules and
Policy-Rules attributes that are configured within an Access- Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes that are configured
Request packet. within an Access-Request packet.
o NAS implementations supporting this specification, which are o NAS implementations supporting this specification, which are
configured to provide location information, MUST echo Basic- configured to provide location information, MUST echo Basic-
Policy-Rules and Extended-Policy-Rules attributes unmodified Location-Policy-Rules and Extended-Location-Policy-Rules
within a subsequent Access-Request packet. In addition, an Attributes unmodified within a subsequent Access-Request packet.
Access-Request packet sent with a Service-Type value of "Authorize In addition, an Access-Request packet sent with a Service-Type
Only" MUST include Basic-Policy-Rules or Extended-Policy-Rules value of "Authorize Only" MUST include Basic-Location-Policy-Rules
attributes received in a previous Access-Accept if the or Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes received in a
FUTURE_REQUESTS flag was set in the Requested-Info attribute. previous Access-Accept if the FUTURE_REQUESTS flag was set in the
Requested-Location-Info Attribute.
7.2.2. RADIUS Server 7.2.2. RADIUS Server
The RADIUS server is a natural place for storing authorization The RADIUS server is a natural place for storing authorization
policies since the user typically has some sort of trust relationship policies since the user typically has some sort of trust relationship
with the entity operating the RADIUS server. Once the infrastructure with the entity operating the RADIUS server. Once the infrastructure
is deployed and location aware applications are available then there is deployed and location aware applications are available then there
might be a strong desire to use location information for other might be a strong desire to use location information for other
purposes as well. purposes as well.
The Common Policy framework [25] that was extended for geolocation The Common Policy framework [RFC4745] that was extended for
privacy [26] are tailored for this purpose. The Extensible Markup geolocation privacy [I-D.ietf-geopriv-policy] are tailored for
Language (XML) Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP) [27] gives this purpose. The Extensible Markup Language (XML) Configuration
users the ability to change their privacy policies using a Access Protocol (XCAP) [I-D.ietf-simple-xcap] gives users the
standardized protocol. These policies are an important tool for ability to change their privacy policies using a standardized
limiting further distribution of the user's location to other protocol. These policies are an important tool for limiting
location based services. further distribution of the user's location to other location
based services.
The RADIUS server MUST behave according to the following guidelines: The RADIUS server MUST behave according to the following guidelines:
o The RADIUS server MUST attach available rules to the Access- o The RADIUS server MUST attach available rules to the Access-
Accept, the Access-Reject or the Access-Challenge message when the Accept, the Access-Reject or the Access-Challenge message when the
RADIUS client is supposed to provide location information. RADIUS client is supposed to provide location information.
o When location information is made available to other entities o When location information is made available to other entities
(e.g., writing to stable storage for latter billing processing) (e.g., writing to stable storage for latter billing processing)
then the RADIUS server MUST attach the privacy rules to location then the RADIUS server MUST attach the privacy rules to location
skipping to change at page 37, line 35 skipping to change at page 40, line 37
brokers, then it is possible to correlate location information with a brokers, then it is possible to correlate location information with a
particular user. As such, it allows the visited network and brokers particular user. As such, it allows the visited network and brokers
to learn movement patterns of users. to learn movement patterns of users.
The user's identity can be "leaked" to the visited network or RADIUS The user's identity can be "leaked" to the visited network or RADIUS
brokers in a number of ways: brokers in a number of ways:
o The user's device may employ a fixed MAC address, or base its IP o The user's device may employ a fixed MAC address, or base its IP
address on such an address. This enables the correlation of the address on such an address. This enables the correlation of the
particular device to its different locations. Techniques exist to particular device to its different locations. Techniques exist to
avoid the use of an IP address that is based on MAC address [28]. avoid the use of an IP address that is based on MAC address
Some link layers make it possible to avoid MAC addresses or change [RFC3041]. Some link layers make it possible to avoid MAC
them dynamically. addresses or change them dynamically.
o Network access authentication procedures, such as PPP CHAP [29] or o Network access authentication procedures, such as PPP CHAP
EAP [24], may reveal the user's identity as a part of the [RFC1994] or EAP [RFC4282], may reveal the user's identity as a
authentication procedure. Techniques exist to avoid this problem part of the authentication procedure. Techniques exist to avoid
in EAP methods, for instance by employing private Network Access this problem in EAP methods, for instance by employing private
Identifiers (NAIs) in the EAP Identity Response message [30] and Network Access Identifiers (NAIs) in the EAP Identity Response
by method-specific private identity exchange in the EAP method message [RFC4187] and by method-specific private identity exchange
(e.g., [30], [31] [32], [33]). Support for identity privacy in the EAP method (e.g., [RFC4187], [I-D.funk-eap-ttls-v0]
within CHAP is not available. [I-D.josefsson-pppext-eap-tls-eap], [I-D.tschofenig-eap-ikev2]).
Support for identity privacy within CHAP is not available.
o RADIUS may return information from the home network to the visited o RADIUS may return information from the home network to the visited
in a manner that makes it possible to either identify the user or in a manner that makes it possible to either identify the user or
at least correlate his session with other sessions, such as the at least correlate his session with other sessions, such as the
use of static data in a Class attribute [2] or in some accounting use of static data in a Class Attribute [RFC2865] or in some
attribute usage scenarios [34]. accounting attribute usage scenarios [RFC4372].
o Mobility protocols may reveal some long-term identifier, such as a o Mobility protocols may reveal some long-term identifier, such as a
home address. home address.
o Application layer protocols may reveal other permanent o Application layer protocols may reveal other permanent
identifiers. identifiers.
To prevent the correlation of identities with location information it To prevent the correlation of identities with location information it
is necessary to prevent leakage of identity information from all is necessary to prevent leakage of identity information from all
sources, not just one. sources, not just one.
skipping to change at page 39, line 10 skipping to change at page 42, line 10
In many cases it is necessary to secure the transport of location In many cases it is necessary to secure the transport of location
information along the RADIUS infrastructure. Mechanisms to achieve information along the RADIUS infrastructure. Mechanisms to achieve
this functionality are discussed in Section 7.1. this functionality are discussed in Section 7.1.
8. IANA Considerations 8. IANA Considerations
The authors request that the Attribute Types, and Attribute Values The authors request that the Attribute Types, and Attribute Values
defined in this document be registered by the Internet Assigned defined in this document be registered by the Internet Assigned
Numbers Authority (IANA) from the RADIUS name spaces as described in Numbers Authority (IANA) from the RADIUS name spaces as described in
the "IANA Considerations" section of RFC 3575 [8], in accordance with the "IANA Considerations" section of RFC 3575 [RFC3575], in
BCP 26 [9]. Additionally, the Attribute Type should be registered in accordance with BCP 26 [RFC2434]. Additionally, the Attribute Type
the Diameter name space. For RADIUS attributes and registries should be registered in the Diameter name space. For RADIUS
created by this document IANA is requested to place them at attributes and registries created by this document IANA is requested
http://www.iana.org/assignments/radius-types. to place them at http://www.iana.org/assignments/radius-types.
This document defines the following attributes: This document defines the following attributes:
Operator-Name Operator-Name
Location-Information Location-Information
Location-Data Location-Data
Basic-Policy-Rules Basic-Location-Policy-Rules
Extended-Policy-Rules Extended-Location-Policy-Rules
Location-Capable Location-Capable
Requested-Info Requested-Location-Info
Please refer to Section 5 for the registered list of numbers. Please refer to Section 5 for the registered list of numbers.
This document also instructs IANA to assign a new value for the This document also instructs IANA to assign a new value for the
Error-Cause attribute [3], of "Location-Info-Required" TBA. Error-Cause Attribute [RFC3576], of "Location-Info-Required" TBA.
Additionally, IANA is requested to create the following new Additionally, IANA is requested to create the following new
registries listed in the subsections below. registries listed in the subsections below.
8.1. New Registry: Operator Namespace Identifier 8.1. New Registry: Operator Namespace Identifier
This document also defines an operator namespace identifier registry This document also defines an operator namespace identifier registry
(used in the Namespace ID field of the Operator-Name attribute). (used in the Namespace ID field of the Operator-Name Attribute).
Note that this document requests IANA only to maintain a registry of Note that this document requests IANA only to maintain a registry of
existing namespaces for use in this identifier field, and not to existing namespaces for use in this identifier field, and not to
establish any namespaces nor to place any values within namespaces. establish any namespaces nor to place any values within namespaces.
IANA is requested to add the following values to the operator IANA is requested to add the following values to the operator
namespace identifier registry using a numerical identifier (allocated namespace identifier registry using a numerical identifier (allocated
in sequence), a token for the operator namespace and a contact person in sequence), a token for the operator namespace and a contact person
for the registry. for the registry.
+----------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ +----------+--------------------+------------------------------------+
|Identifier| Operator Namespace | Contact Person | |Identifier| Operator Namespace | Contact Person |
| | Token | | | | Token | |
+----------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ +----------+--------------------+------------------------------------+
| 48 | TADIG | TD.13 Coordinator | | 0x30 | TADIG | TD.13 Coordinator |
| | | (td13@gsm.org) | | | | (td13@gsm.org) |
| 49 | REALM | IETF O&M Area Directors | | 0x31 | REALM | IETF O&M Area Directors |
| | | (ops-chairs@ietf.org) | | | | (ops-chairs@ietf.org) |
| 50 | E212 | ITU Director | | 0x32 | E212 | ITU Director |
| | | (tsbdir@itu.int) | | | | (tsbdir@itu.int) |
| 51 | ICC | ITU Director | | 0x33 | ICC | ITU Director |
| | | (tsbdir@itu.int) | | | | (tsbdir@itu.int) |
+----------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ +----------+--------------------+------------------------------------+
Note that the above identifier values represent the ASCII value '0' Note that the above identifier values represent the ASCII value '0'
(decimal 48), '1' (decimal 49), '2' (decimal 50) and '3' (decimal (decimal 48 or hex 0x30), '1' (decimal 49, or hex 0x31), '2' (decimal
51). This encoding was chosen to simplify parsing. 50, or hex 0x32) and '3' (decimal 51, or hex 0x33). This encoding
was chosen to simplify parsing.
Requests to IANA for a new value for a Namespace ID will be approved Requests to IANA for a new value for a Namespace ID will be approved
by Expert Review. The Designated Expert Reviewer team for these by Expert Review. The Designated Expert Reviewer team for these
requests is the current Operations Area Director and the RADEXT requests is the current Operations Area Director and the RADEXT
working group chairs or the working group chairs of a designated working group chairs or the working group chairs of a designated
successor working group. successor working group.
The Expert Reviewer should ensure that a new entry is indeed required The Expert Reviewer should ensure that a new entry is indeed required
or could fit within an existing database, e.g., whether there is a or could fit within an existing database, e.g., whether there is a
real requirement to provide a token for an Namespace ID because one real requirement to provide a token for an Namespace ID because one
is already up and running, or whether the REALM identifier plus the is already up and running, or whether the REALM identifier plus the
name should recommended to the requester. In addition, the Expert name should recommended to the requester. In addition, the Expert
Reviewer should ascertain to some reasonable degree of diligence that Reviewer should ascertain to some reasonable degree of diligence that
a new entry is a correct reference to an Operator Namespace, when a a new entry is a correct reference to an Operator Namespace, when a
new one is registered. new one is registered.
8.2. New Registry: Location Profiles 8.2. New Registry: Location Profiles
Section 4.2 defines the Location-Information attribute and a Code Section 4.2 defines the Location-Information Attribute and a Code
field that contains 8 bit integer value. Two values, zero and one, field that contains 8 bit integer value. Two values, zero and one,
are defined in this document, namely: are defined in this document, namely:
Value (0): Civic location profile described in Section 4.3.1 Value (0): Civic location profile described in Section 4.3.1
Value (1): Geospatial location profile described in Section 4.3.2 Value (1): Geospatial location profile described in Section 4.3.2
The remaining values are reserved for future use. The remaining values are reserved for future use.
Following the policies outline in [8] the available bits with a Following the policies outline in [RFC3575] the available bits with a
description of their semantic will be assigned after Expert Review description of their semantic will be assigned after Expert Review
initiated by the O&M Area Directors in consultation with the RADEXT initiated by the O&M Area Directors in consultation with the RADEXT
working group chairs or the working group chairs of a designated working group chairs or the working group chairs of a designated
successor working group. Updates can be provided based on expert successor working group. Updates can be provided based on expert
approval only. A designated expert will be appointed by the O&M Area approval only. A designated expert will be appointed by the O&M Area
Directors. No mechanism to mark entries as "deprecated" is Directors. No mechanism to mark entries as "deprecated" is
envisioned. Based on expert approval it is possible to delete envisioned. Based on expert approval it is possible to delete
entries from the registry. entries from the registry.
Each registration must include the value and the corresponding Each registration must include the value and the corresponding
semantic of the defined location profile. semantic of the defined location profile.
8.3. New Registry: Location Capable Attribute 8.3. New Registry: Location Capable Attribute
Section 4.6 defines the Location-Capable attribute that contains a Section 4.6 defines the Location-Capable Attribute that contains a
bit map. 32 bits are available whereby a single bit, bit (0), bit map. 32 bits are available whereby a single bit, bit (0),
indicating 'Location Capable' is defined by this document. Bits 1-15 indicating 'Location Capable' is defined by this document. Bits 1-15
are reserved for future use. are reserved for future use.
Following the policies outline in [8] the available bits with a Following the policies outline in [RFC3575] the available bits with a
description of their semantic will be assigned after Expert Review description of their semantic will be assigned after Expert Review
initiated by the O&M Area Directors in consultation with the RADEXT initiated by the O&M Area Directors in consultation with the RADEXT
working group chairs or the working group chairs of a designated working group chairs or the working group chairs of a designated
successor working group. Updates can be provided based on expert successor working group. Updates can be provided based on expert
approval only. A designated expert will be appointed by the O&M Area approval only. A designated expert will be appointed by the O&M Area
Directors. No mechanism to mark entries as "deprecated" is Directors. No mechanism to mark entries as "deprecated" is
envisioned. Based on expert approval it is possible to delete envisioned. Based on expert approval it is possible to delete
entries from the registry. entries from the registry.
Each registration must include the bit position and the semantic of Each registration must include the bit position and the semantic of
the bit. the bit.
8.4. New Registry: Entity Types 8.4. New Registry: Entity Types
Section 4.2 defines the Location-Information attribute that contains Section 4.2 defines the Location-Information Attribute that contains
an 8 bit Entity field. Two values are registered by this document, an 8 bit Entity field. Two values are registered by this document,
namely: namely:
Value (0) describes the location of the user's client device Value (0) describes the location of the user's client device
Value (1) describes the location of the RADIUS client Value (1) describes the location of the RADIUS client
All other values are reserved for future use. All other values are reserved for future use.
Following the policies outline in [8] the available bits with a Following the policies outline in [RFC3575] the available bits with a
description of their semantic will be assigned after Expert Review description of their semantic will be assigned after Expert Review
initiated by the O&M Area Directors in consultation with the RADEXT initiated by the O&M Area Directors in consultation with the RADEXT
working group chairs or the working group chairs of a designated working group chairs or the working group chairs of a designated
successor working group. Updates can be provided based on expert successor working group. Updates can be provided based on expert
approval only. A designated expert will be appointed by the O&M Area approval only. A designated expert will be appointed by the O&M Area
Directors. No mechanism to mark entries as "deprecated" is Directors. No mechanism to mark entries as "deprecated" is
envisioned. Based on expert approval it is possible to delete envisioned. Based on expert approval it is possible to delete
entries from the registry. entries from the registry.
Each registration must include the value and a corresponding Each registration must include the value and a corresponding
description. description.
8.5. New Registry: Privacy Flags 8.5. New Registry: Privacy Flags
Section 4.4 defines the Basic Policy Rules attribute that contains Section 4.4 defines the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute that
flags indicating privacy settings. 16 bits are available whereby a contains flags indicating privacy settings. 16 bits are available
single bit, bit (0), indicating 'retransmission allowed' is defined whereby a single bit, bit (0), indicating 'retransmission allowed' is
by this document. Bits 1-15 are reserved for future use. defined by this document. Bits 1-15 are reserved for future use.
Following the policies outline in [8] the available bits with a Following the policies outline in [RFC3575] the available bits with a
description of their semantic will be assigned after Expert Review description of their semantic will be assigned after Expert Review
initiated by the O&M Area Directors in consultation with the RADEXT initiated by the O&M Area Directors in consultation with the RADEXT
working group chairs or the working group chairs of a designated working group chairs or the working group chairs of a designated
successor working group. Updates can be provided based on expert successor working group. Updates can be provided based on expert
approval only. A designated expert will be appointed by the O&M Area approval only. A designated expert will be appointed by the O&M Area
Directors. No mechanism to mark entries as "deprecated" is Directors. No mechanism to mark entries as "deprecated" is
envisioned. Based on expert approval it is possible to delete envisioned. Based on expert approval it is possible to delete
entries from the registry. entries from the registry.
Each registration must include the bit position and the semantic of Each registration must include the bit position and the semantic of
the bit. the bit.
8.6. New Registry: Requested-Info Attribute 8.6. New Registry: Requested-Location-Info Attribute
Section 4.7 defines the Requested-Info attribute that contains a bit Section 4.7 defines the Requested-Location-Info Attribute that
map. 32 bits are available whereby a 5 bits are defined by this contains a bit map. 32 bits are available whereby a 5 bits are
document. This document creates a new IANA registry for the defined by this document. This document creates a new IANA registry
Requested-Info attribute. IANA is requested to add the following for the Requested-Location-Info Attribute. IANA is requested to add
values to this registry: the following values to this registry:
+----------+----------------------+ +----------+----------------------+
| Value | Capability Token | | Value | Capability Token |
+----------+----------------------+ +----------+----------------------+
| 1 | CIVIC_LOCATION | | 1 | CIVIC_LOCATION |
| 2 | GEO_LOCATION | | 2 | GEO_LOCATION |
| 4 | USERS_LOCATION | | 4 | USERS_LOCATION |
| 8 | NAS_LOCATION | | 8 | NAS_LOCATION |
| 16 | FUTURE_REQUESTS | | 16 | FUTURE_REQUESTS |
| 32 | NONE |
+----------+----------------------+ +----------+----------------------+
The semantic of these values is defined in Section 4.7. The semantic of these values is defined in Section 4.7.
Following the policies outline in [8] new Capability Tokens with a Following the policies outline in [RFC3575] new Capability Tokens
description of their semantic for usage with the Requested-Info with a description of their semantic for usage with the Requested-
attribute will be assigned after Expert Review initiated by the O&M Location-Info Attribute will be assigned after Expert Review
Area Directors in consultation with the RADEXT working group chairs initiated by the O&M Area Directors in consultation with the RADEXT
or the working group chairs of a designated successor working group. working group chairs or the working group chairs of a designated
Updates can be provided based on expert approval only. A designated successor working group. Updates can be provided based on expert
expert will be appointed by the O&M Area Directors. No mechanism to approval only. A designated expert will be appointed by the O&M Area
mark entries as "deprecated" is envisioned. Based on expert approval Directors. No mechanism to mark entries as "deprecated" is
it is possible to delete entries from the registry. envisioned. Based on expert approval it is possible to delete
entries from the registry.
Each registration must include: Each registration must include:
Name: Name:
Capability Token (i.e., an identifier of the capability) Capability Token (i.e., an identifier of the capability)
Description: Description:
Brief description indicating the meaning of the info element. Brief description indicating the meaning of the info element.
Numerical Value: Numerical Value:
A numerical value that is placed into the Capability attribute A numerical value that is placed into the Capability Attribute
representing a bit in the bit-string of the Requested-Info representing a bit in the bit-string of the Requested-Location-
attribute. Info Attribute.
9. Acknowledgments 9. Contributors
We would like to thank Bernhard Aboba for the numerous contributions
to this document.
10. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the following people for their help The authors would like to thank the following people for their help
with an initial version of this draft and for their input: Chuck with an initial version of this draft and for their input: Chuck
Black, Paul Congdon, Jouni Korhonen, Sami Ala-luukko, Farooq Bari, Ed Black, Paul Congdon, Jouni Korhonen, Sami Ala-luukko, Farooq Bari, Ed
Van Horne, Mark Grayson, Jukka Tuomi, Jorge Cuellar, and Christian Van Horne, Mark Grayson, Jukka Tuomi, Jorge Cuellar, and Christian
Guenther. Guenther.
Henning Schulzrinne provided the civic location information content Henning Schulzrinne provided the civic location information content
found in this draft. The geospatial location information format is found in this draft. The geospatial location information format is
based on work done by James Polk, John Schnizlein and Marc Linsner. based on work done by James Polk, John Schnizlein and Marc Linsner.
skipping to change at page 44, line 30 skipping to change at page 48, line 30
Bernrad Aboba, Jari Arkko, Parviz Yegani, Serge Manning, Kuntal Bernrad Aboba, Jari Arkko, Parviz Yegani, Serge Manning, Kuntal
Chowdury, Pasi Eronen, Blair Bullock and Eugene Chang for their Chowdury, Pasi Eronen, Blair Bullock and Eugene Chang for their
feedback to an initial version of this draft. We would like to thank feedback to an initial version of this draft. We would like to thank
Jari Arkko for his text contributions. Lionel Morand provided Jari Arkko for his text contributions. Lionel Morand provided
detailed feedback on numerous issues. His comments helped to improve detailed feedback on numerous issues. His comments helped to improve
the quality of this document. Jouni Korhonen and John Loughney the quality of this document. Jouni Korhonen and John Loughney
helped us with the Diameter RADIUS interoperability. Andreas helped us with the Diameter RADIUS interoperability. Andreas
Pashalidis reviewed a later version document and provided a number of Pashalidis reviewed a later version document and provided a number of
comments. Bernard Aboba, Alan DeKok, Lionel Morand, Jouni Korhonen, comments. Bernard Aboba, Alan DeKok, Lionel Morand, Jouni Korhonen,
David Nelson and Emile van Bergen provided guidance on the Requested- David Nelson and Emile van Bergen provided guidance on the Requested-
Info attribute and participated in the capability exchange Location-Info Attribute and participated in the capability exchange
discussions. Allison Mankin, Jouni Korhonen and Pasi Eronen provided discussions. Allison Mankin, Jouni Korhonen and Pasi Eronen provided
text for the operator namespace identifier registry. Jouni Korhonen text for the operator namespace identifier registry. Jouni Korhonen
interacted with the GSMA to find a contact person for the TADIG interacted with the GSMA to find a contact person for the TADIG
operator namespace and Scott Bradner consulted the ITU-T to find a operator namespace and Scott Bradner consulted the ITU-T to find a
contact person for the E212 and the ICC operator namespace. contact person for the E212 and the ICC operator namespace.
This document is based on the discussions within the IETF GEOPRIV This document is based on the discussions within the IETF GEOPRIV
working group. Therefore, the authors thank Henning Schulzrinne, working group. Therefore, the authors thank Henning Schulzrinne,
James Polk, John Morris, Allison Mankin, Randall Gellens, Andrew James Polk, John Morris, Allison Mankin, Randall Gellens, Andrew
Newton, Ted Hardie, Jon Peterson for their time to discuss a number Newton, Ted Hardie, Jon Peterson for their time to discuss a number
skipping to change at page 46, line 5 skipping to change at page 50, line 5
provided several draft reviews and we would like to thank them for provided several draft reviews and we would like to thank them for
the help and their patience. the help and their patience.
Finally, we would like to thank Bernard Aboba and Dan Romascanu for Finally, we would like to thank Bernard Aboba and Dan Romascanu for
the IETF Last Call comments, Derek Atkins for his security area the IETF Last Call comments, Derek Atkins for his security area
directorate review and Yoshiko Chong for spotting a bug in the IANA directorate review and Yoshiko Chong for spotting a bug in the IANA
consideration section. Bernard spend of lot of his time to interact consideration section. Bernard spend of lot of his time to interact
with the authors to resolve the IETF LC issues he raised. We would with the authors to resolve the IETF LC issues he raised. We would
like to thank him for the energie he spend on this document. like to thank him for the energie he spend on this document.
10. References 11. References
10.1. Normative References 11.1. Normative References
[1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[2] Rigney, C., Willens, S., Rubens, A., and W. Simpson, "Remote [RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", RFC 2865, IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
June 2000. October 1998.
[3] Chiba, M., Dommety, G., Eklund, M., Mitton, D., and B. Aboba, [RFC2865] Rigney, C., Willens, S., Rubens, A., and W. Simpson,
"Dynamic Authorization Extensions to Remote Authentication Dial "Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)",
In User Service (RADIUS)", RFC 3576, July 2003. RFC 2865, June 2000.
[4] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello, [RFC3490] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello,
"Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)", "Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)",
RFC 3490, March 2003. RFC 3490, March 2003.
[5] Schulzrinne, H., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4 [RFC3575] Aboba, B., "IANA Considerations for RADIUS (Remote
and DHCPv6) Option for Civic Addresses Configuration Authentication Dial In User Service)", RFC 3575,
Information", RFC 4776, November 2006. July 2003.
[6] Polk, J., Schnizlein, J., and M. Linsner, "Dynamic Host [RFC3576] Chiba, M., Dommety, G., Eklund, M., Mitton, D., and B.
Configuration Protocol Option for Coordinate-based Location Aboba, "Dynamic Authorization Extensions to Remote
Configuration Information", RFC 3825, July 2004. Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", RFC 3576,
July 2003.
[7] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J. Arkko, [RFC3588] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J.
"Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, September 2003. Arkko, "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, September 2003.
[8] Aboba, B., "IANA Considerations for RADIUS (Remote [RFC3825] Polk, J., Schnizlein, J., and M. Linsner, "Dynamic Host
Authentication Dial In User Service)", RFC 3575, July 2003. Configuration Protocol Option for Coordinate-based
Location Configuration Information", RFC 3825, July 2004.
[9] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA [RFC4776] Schulzrinne, H., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, (DHCPv4 and DHCPv6) Option for Civic Addresses
October 1998. Configuration Information", RFC 4776, November 2006.
10.2. Informative References 11.2. Informative References
[10] Cuellar, J., Morris, J., Mulligan, D., Peterson, D., and D. [GMLv3] "Open Geography Markup Language (GML) Implementation
Polk, "Geopriv Requirements", RFC 3693, February 2004. Specification", OGC 02-023r4,
http://www.opengis.org/techno/implementation.htm", ,
January 2003.
[11] Rigney, C., "RADIUS Accounting", RFC 2866, June 2000. [GSM] "TADIG Naming Conventions, Version 4.1", GSM Association
Official Document TD.13", , June 2006.
[12] Chiba, M., "Dynamic Authorization Extensions to Remote [I-D.funk-eap-ttls-v0]
Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", Funk, P. and S. Blake-Wilson, "EAP Tunneled TLS
draft-ietf-radext-rfc3576bis-08 (work in progress), June 2007. Authentication Protocol Version 0 (EAP-TTLSv0)",
draft-funk-eap-ttls-v0-01 (work in progress), April 2007.
[13] "TADIG Naming Conventions, Version 4.1", GSM Association [I-D.ietf-geopriv-policy]
Official Document TD.13", , June 2006. Schulzrinne, H., "Geolocation Policy: A Document Format
for Expressing Privacy Preferences for Location
Information", draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-12 (work in
progress), May 2007.
[14] "The Unicode Standard -- Worldwide Character Encoding -- [I-D.ietf-radext-rfc3576bis]
Version 1.0, Addison- Wesley, Volume 1, 1991, Volume 2", , Chiba, M., "Dynamic Authorization Extensions to Remote
1992. Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)",
draft-ietf-radext-rfc3576bis-08 (work in progress),
June 2007.
[15] "The international identification plan for mobile terminals and [I-D.ietf-simple-xcap]
mobile users, ITU-T Recommendation E.212", , May 2004. Rosenberg, J., "The Extensible Markup Language (XML)
Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP)",
draft-ietf-simple-xcap-12 (work in progress),
October 2006.
[16] "Designations for interconnections among operators' networks, [I-D.ietf-sip-location-conveyance]
ITU-T Recommendation M.1400", , January 2004. Polk, J. and B. Rosen, "Session Initiation Protocol
Location Conveyance",
draft-ietf-sip-location-conveyance-07 (work in progress),
February 2007.
[17] "Codes for the representation of names of countries and their [I-D.josefsson-pppext-eap-tls-eap]
subdivisions - Part 1: Country codes, ISO 3166-1", , 1997. Josefsson, S., Palekar, A., Simon, D., and G. Zorn,
"Protected EAP Protocol (PEAP) Version 2",
draft-josefsson-pppext-eap-tls-eap-10 (work in progress),
October 2004.
[18] Mills, D., "Network Time Protocol (Version 3) Specification, [I-D.tschofenig-eap-ikev2]
Implementation", RFC 1305, March 1992. Tschofenig, H., "EAP IKEv2 Method",
draft-tschofenig-eap-ikev2-13 (work in progress),
March 2007.
[19] Peterson, J., "A Presence-based GEOPRIV Location Object [ISO] "Codes for the representation of names of countries and
Format", RFC 4119, December 2005. their subdivisions - Part 1: Country codes, ISO 3166-1",
, 1997.
[20] Calhoun, P., Zorn, G., Spence, D., and D. Mitton, "Diameter [ITU1400] "Designations for interconnections among operators'
Network Access Server Application", RFC 4005, August 2005. networks, ITU-T Recommendation M.1400", , January 2004.
[21] Eronen, P., Hiller, T., and G. Zorn, "Diameter Extensible [ITU212] "The international identification plan for mobile
Authentication Protocol (EAP) Application", RFC 4072, terminals and mobile users, ITU-T Recommendation E.212",
August 2005. , May 2004.
[22] Aboba, B. and P. Calhoun, "RADIUS (Remote Authentication Dial [RFC1305] Mills, D., "Network Time Protocol (Version 3)
In User Service) Support For Extensible Authentication Protocol Specification, Implementation", RFC 1305, March 1992.
(EAP)", RFC 3579, September 2003.
[23] Kaufman, C., "Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol", [RFC1994] Simpson, W., "PPP Challenge Handshake Authentication
RFC 4306, December 2005. Protocol (CHAP)", RFC 1994, August 1996.
[24] Aboba, B., Beadles, M., Arkko, J., and P. Eronen, "The Network [RFC2866] Rigney, C., "RADIUS Accounting", RFC 2866, June 2000.
Access Identifier", RFC 4282, December 2005.
[25] Schulzrinne, H., Tschofenig, H., Morris, J., Cuellar, J., Polk, [RFC3041] Narten, T. and R. Draves, "Privacy Extensions for
J., and J. Rosenberg, "Common Policy: A Document Format for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6", RFC 3041,
Expressing Privacy Preferences", RFC 4745, February 2007. January 2001.
[26] Schulzrinne, H., "Geolocation Policy: A Document Format for [RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
Expressing Privacy Preferences for Location Information", A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-12 (work in progress), May 2007. Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
June 2002.
[27] Rosenberg, J., "The Extensible Markup Language (XML) [RFC3579] Aboba, B. and P. Calhoun, "RADIUS (Remote Authentication
Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP)", Dial In User Service) Support For Extensible
draft-ietf-simple-xcap-12 (work in progress), October 2006. Authentication Protocol (EAP)", RFC 3579, September 2003.
[28] Narten, T. and R. Draves, "Privacy Extensions for Stateless [RFC3693] Cuellar, J., Morris, J., Mulligan, D., Peterson, D., and
Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6", RFC 3041, January 2001. D. Polk, "Geopriv Requirements", RFC 3693, February 2004.
[29] Simpson, W., "PPP Challenge Handshake Authentication Protocol [RFC3694] Danley, M., "Threat Analysis of the Geopriv Protocol",
(CHAP)", RFC 1994, August 1996. RFC 3694, September 2003.
[30] Arkko, J. and H. Haverinen, "Extensible Authentication Protocol [RFC4005] Calhoun, P., Zorn, G., Spence, D., and D. Mitton,
Method for 3rd Generation Authentication and Key Agreement "Diameter Network Access Server Application", RFC 4005,
(EAP-AKA)", RFC 4187, January 2006. August 2005.
[31] Funk, P. and S. Blake-Wilson, "EAP Tunneled TLS Authentication [RFC4017] Stanley, D., Walker, J., and B. Aboba, "Extensible
Protocol Version 0 (EAP-TTLSv0)", draft-funk-eap-ttls-v0-01 Authentication Protocol (EAP) Method Requirements for
(work in progress), April 2007. Wireless LANs", RFC 4017, March 2005.
[32] Josefsson, S., Palekar, A., Simon, D., and G. Zorn, "Protected [RFC4072] Eronen, P., Hiller, T., and G. Zorn, "Diameter Extensible
EAP Protocol (PEAP) Version 2", Authentication Protocol (EAP) Application", RFC 4072,
draft-josefsson-pppext-eap-tls-eap-10 (work in progress), August 2005.
October 2004.
[33] Tschofenig, H., "EAP IKEv2 Method", [RFC4119] Peterson, J., "A Presence-based GEOPRIV Location Object
draft-tschofenig-eap-ikev2-13 (work in progress), March 2007. Format", RFC 4119, December 2005.
[34] Adrangi, F., Lior, A., Korhonen, J., and J. Loughney, [RFC4187] Arkko, J. and H. Haverinen, "Extensible Authentication
"Chargeable User Identity", RFC 4372, January 2006. Protocol Method for 3rd Generation Authentication and Key
Agreement (EAP-AKA)", RFC 4187, January 2006.
[35] "Open Geography Markup Language (GML) Implementation [RFC4282] Aboba, B., Beadles, M., Arkko, J., and P. Eronen, "The
Specification", OGC 02-023r4, Network Access Identifier", RFC 4282, December 2005.
http://www.opengis.org/techno/implementation.htm", ,
January 2003.
[36] Stanley, D., Walker, J., and B. Aboba, "Extensible [RFC4306] Kaufman, C., "Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol",
Authentication Protocol (EAP) Method Requirements for Wireless RFC 4306, December 2005.
LANs", RFC 4017, March 2005.
[37] Danley, M., "Threat Analysis of the Geopriv Protocol", [RFC4372] Adrangi, F., Lior, A., Korhonen, J., and J. Loughney,
RFC 3694, September 2003. "Chargeable User Identity", RFC 4372, January 2006.
[38] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, A., [RFC4745] Schulzrinne, H., Tschofenig, H., Morris, J., Cuellar, J.,
Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. Schooler, "SIP: Polk, J., and J. Rosenberg, "Common Policy: A Document
Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, June 2002. Format for Expressing Privacy Preferences", RFC 4745,
February 2007.
[39] Polk, J. and B. Rosen, "Session Initiation Protocol Location [Unicode] "The Unicode Standard -- Worldwide Character Encoding --
Conveyance", draft-ietf-sip-location-conveyance-07 (work in Version 1.0, Addison- Wesley, Volume 1, 1991, Volume 2",
progress), February 2007. , 1992.
Appendix A. Matching with Geopriv Requirements Appendix A. Matching with Geopriv Requirements
This section compares the requirements for a GEOPRIV Using Protocol, This section compares the requirements for a GEOPRIV Using Protocol,
described in [10], against the approach of distributing Location described in [RFC3693], against the approach of distributing Location
Objects with RADIUS. Objects with RADIUS.
In Appendix A.1 and Appendix A.2 we discuss privacy implications when In Appendix A.1 and Appendix A.2 we discuss privacy implications when
RADIUS entities make location information available to other parties. RADIUS entities make location information available to other parties.
In Appendix A.3 the requirements are matched against these two In Appendix A.3 the requirements are matched against these two
scenarios. scenarios.
A.1. Distribution of Location Information at the User's Home Network A.1. Distribution of Location Information at the User's Home Network
When location information is conveyed from the RADIUS client to the When location information is conveyed from the RADIUS client to the
skipping to change at page 49, line 51 skipping to change at page 54, line 51
|Generator | | |Location |<------------->|Recipient | |Generator | | |Location |<------------->|Recipient |
+----------+ publication |Server | interface | | +----------+ publication |Server | interface | |
|RADIUS |<------------->+----------+ +----------+ |RADIUS |<------------->+----------+ +----------+
|Client | interface |RADIUS | E.g., SIP/HTTP |Client | interface |RADIUS | E.g., SIP/HTTP
+----------+ | |Server | +----------+ | |Server |
| +----------+ | +----------+
E.g., NAS RADIUS E.g., NAS RADIUS
| |
| |
Figure 18: Location Server at the Home Network Figure 19: Location Server at the Home Network
The term 'Rule Holder' in Figure 18 denotes the entity that creates The term 'Rule Holder' in Figure 19 denotes the entity that creates
the authorization rule set. the authorization rule set.
A.2. Distribution of Location Information at the Visited Network A.2. Distribution of Location Information at the Visited Network
This section describes a scenario where location information made This section describes a scenario where location information made
available to Location Recipients by a Location Server in the visited available to Location Recipients by a Location Server in the visited
network. Some identifier needs to be used as an index within the network. Some identifier needs to be used as an index within the
location database. One possible identifier is the Network Access location database. One possible identifier is the Network Access
Identifier. RFC 4282 [24] and RFC 4372 [34] provide background Identifier. RFC 4282 [RFC4282] and RFC 4372 [RFC4372] provide
whether entities in the visited network can obtain the user's NAI in background whether entities in the visited network can obtain the
cleartext. user's NAI in cleartext.
The visited network provides location information to a Location The visited network provides location information to a Location
Recipient (e.g., via SIP or HTTP). This document enables the NAS to Recipient (e.g., via SIP or HTTP). This document enables the NAS to
obtain the user's privacy policy via the interaction with the RADIUS obtain the user's privacy policy via the interaction with the RADIUS
server. Otherwise only default policies, which are very restrictive, server. Otherwise only default policies, which are very restrictive,
are available. This allows the Location Server in the visited are available. This allows the Location Server in the visited
network to ensure act according to the user's policies. network to ensure act according to the user's policies.
The subsequent figure shows the interacting entities graphically. The subsequent figure shows the interacting entities graphically.
skipping to change at page 51, line 31 skipping to change at page 56, line 31
|Location | | v |Location | | v
|Server | | +----------+ |Server | | +----------+
+----------+ Rule Transport|RADIUS | +----------+ Rule Transport|RADIUS |
|RADIUS |<------------->|Server | |RADIUS |<------------->|Server |
|Client | RADIUS +----------+ |Client | RADIUS +----------+
+----------+ | +----------+ |
|Location | | |Location | |
|Generator | |Generator |
+----------+ +----------+
Figure 19: Location Server at the Visited Network Figure 20: Location Server at the Visited Network
Location information always travels with privacy policies. This Location information always travels with privacy policies. This
document enables the RADIUS client to obtain these policies. The document enables the RADIUS client to obtain these policies. The
Location Server can subsequently act according to these policies to Location Server can subsequently act according to these policies to
provide access control using the extended policy rules and to adhere provide access control using the Extended-Location-Policy-Rules and
the privacy statements in the basic policy rules. to adhere the privacy statements in the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules.
A.3. Requirements matching A.3. Requirements matching
Section 7.1 of [10] details the requirements of a "Location Object". Section 7.1 of [RFC3693] details the requirements of a "Location
We discuss these requirements in the subsequent list. Object". We discuss these requirements in the subsequent list.
Req. 1. (Location Object generalities): Req. 1. (Location Object generalities):
* Regarding requirement 1.1, the syntax and semantic of the * Regarding requirement 1.1, the syntax and semantic of the
location object is taken from the [6] and [5]. It is location object is taken from the [RFC3825] and [RFC4776]. It
furthermore possible to convert it to the format used in GMLv3 is furthermore possible to convert it to the format used in
[35], as used with PIDF-LO [19]. GMLv3 [GMLv3], as used with PIDF-LO [RFC4119].
* Regarding requirement 1.2, a number of fields in the civic * Regarding requirement 1.2, a number of fields in the civic
location information format are optional. location information format are optional.
* Regarding requirement 1.3, the inclusion of type of place item * Regarding requirement 1.3, the inclusion of type of place item
(CAtype 29) used in the DHCP civic format gives a further (CAtype 29) used in the DHCP civic format gives a further
classification of the location. This attribute can be seen as classification of the location. This attribute can be seen as
an extension. an extension.
* Regarding requirement 1.4, this document does not define the * Regarding requirement 1.4, this document does not define the
skipping to change at page 53, line 27 skipping to change at page 58, line 27
* Regarding requirement 2.6, this document provides the * Regarding requirement 2.6, this document provides the
capability for the RADIUS server to indicate what type of capability for the RADIUS server to indicate what type of
location information it would like to see from the RADIUS location information it would like to see from the RADIUS
client. client.
* Regarding requirement 2.7, timing information is provided with * Regarding requirement 2.7, timing information is provided with
'sighting time' and 'time-to-live' field defined in 'sighting time' and 'time-to-live' field defined in
Section 4.2. Section 4.2.
* Regarding requirement 2.8, a reference to an external (more * Regarding requirement 2.8, a reference to an external (more
detailed rule set) is provided with the Section 4.5 attribute. detailed rule set) is provided with the Extended-Location-
Policy-Rules attribute Section 4.5 .
* Regarding requirement 2.9, security headers and trailers are * Regarding requirement 2.9, security headers and trailers are
provided as part of the RADIUS protocol or even as part of provided as part of the RADIUS protocol or even as part of
IPsec. IPsec.
* Regarding requirement 2.10, a version number in RADIUS is * Regarding requirement 2.10, a version number in RADIUS is
provided with the IANA registration of the attributes. New provided with the IANA registration of the attributes. New
attributes are assigned a new IANA number. attributes are assigned a new IANA number.
Req. 3. (Location Data Types): Req. 3. (Location Data Types):
skipping to change at page 53, line 50 skipping to change at page 58, line 51
geospatial location information as described in Section 4.3.2 geospatial location information as described in Section 4.3.2
and in Section 4.3.1. and in Section 4.3.1.
* With the support of civic and geospatial location information * With the support of civic and geospatial location information
support requirement 3.2 is fulfilled. support requirement 3.2 is fulfilled.
* Regarding requirement 3.3, the geospatial location information * Regarding requirement 3.3, the geospatial location information
used by this document only refers to absolute coordinates. used by this document only refers to absolute coordinates.
However, the granularity of the location information can be However, the granularity of the location information can be
reduced with the help of the AltRes, LoRes, LaRes fields reduced with the help of the AltRes, LoRes, LaRes fields
described in [6]. described in [RFC3825].
* Regarding requirement 3.4, further Location Data Types can be * Regarding requirement 3.4, further Location Data Types can be
added via new coordinate reference systems (CRSs) (see Datum added via new coordinate reference systems (CRSs) (see Datum
field in [6]) and via extensions to [6] and [5]. field in [RFC3825]) and via extensions to [RFC3825] and
[RFC4776].
Section 7.2 of [10] details the requirements of a "Using Protocol". Section 7.2 of [RFC3693] details the requirements of a "Using
These requirements are listed below: Protocol". These requirements are listed below:
Req. 4.: The using protocol has to obey the privacy and security Req. 4.: The using protocol has to obey the privacy and security
instructions coded in the Location Object regarding the instructions coded in the Location Object regarding the
transmission and storage of the LO. This document requires that transmission and storage of the LO. This document requires that
entities that aim to make location information available to third entities that aim to make location information available to third
parties are required to obey the privacy instructions. parties are required to obey the privacy instructions.
Req. 5.: The using protocol will typically facilitate that the keys Req. 5.: The using protocol will typically facilitate that the keys
associated with the credentials are transported to the respective associated with the credentials are transported to the respective
parties, that is, key establishment is the responsibility of the parties, that is, key establishment is the responsibility of the
skipping to change at page 54, line 34 skipping to change at page 59, line 35
considerations (see Section 7.2) are also relevant for this considerations (see Section 7.2) are also relevant for this
requirement. requirement.
Req. 6. (Single Message Transfer): In particular, for tracking of Req. 6. (Single Message Transfer): In particular, for tracking of
small target devices, the design should allow a single message/ small target devices, the design should allow a single message/
packet transmission of location as a complete transaction. The packet transmission of location as a complete transaction. The
encoding of the Location Object is specifically tailored towards encoding of the Location Object is specifically tailored towards
the inclusion into a single message that even respects the (Path) the inclusion into a single message that even respects the (Path)
MTU size. MTU size.
Section 7.3 of [10] details the requirements of a "Rule based Section 7.3 of [RFC3693] details the requirements of a "Rule based
Location Data Transfer". These requirements are listed below: Location Data Transfer". These requirements are listed below:
Req. 7. (LS Rules): With the scenario shown in Figure 18 the Req. 7. (LS Rules): With the scenario shown in Figure 19 the
decision of a Location Server to provide a Location Recipient decision of a Location Server to provide a Location Recipient
access to location information is based on Rule Maker-defined access to location information is based on Rule Maker-defined
Privacy Rules that are stored at the home network. With regard to Privacy Rules that are stored at the home network. With regard to
the scenario shown in Figure 19 the Rule Maker-defined Privacy the scenario shown in Figure 20 the Rule Maker-defined Privacy
Rules are sent from the RADIUS server to the NAS (see Section 4.4, Rules are sent from the RADIUS server to the NAS (see Section 4.4,
Section 4.5 and Section 7.2 for more details). Section 4.5 and Section 7.2 for more details).
Req. 8. (LG Rules): For all usage scenario it is possible to Req. 8. (LG Rules): For all usage scenario it is possible to
consider the privacy rule before transmitting location information consider the privacy rule before transmitting location information
from the NAS to the RADIUS server or even to third parties. In from the NAS to the RADIUS server or even to third parties. In
the case of an out-of-band agreement between the owner of the NAS the case of an out-of-band agreement between the owner of the NAS
and the owner of the RADIUS server privacy might be applied on a and the owner of the RADIUS server privacy might be applied on a
higher granularity. For the scenario shown in Figure 18 the higher granularity. For the scenario shown in Figure 19 the
visited network is already in possession of the users location visited network is already in possession of the users location
information prior to the authentication and authorization of the information prior to the authentication and authorization of the
user. A correlation between the location and the user identity user. A correlation between the location and the user identity
might, however, still not be possible for the visited network (as might, however, still not be possible for the visited network (as
explained in Section 7.2). A Location Server in the visited explained in Section 7.2). A Location Server in the visited
network has to evaluate available rulesets. network has to evaluate available rulesets.
Req. 9. (Viewer Rules): The Rule Maker might define (via mechanisms Req. 9. (Viewer Rules): The Rule Maker might define (via mechanisms
outside the scope of this document) which policy rules are outside the scope of this document) which policy rules are
disclosed to other entities. disclosed to other entities.
Req. 10. (Full Rule language): Geopriv has defined a rule language Req. 10. (Full Rule language): Geopriv has defined a rule language
capable of expressing a wide range of privacy rules which is capable of expressing a wide range of privacy rules which is
applicable in the area of the distribution of Location Objects. A applicable in the area of the distribution of Location Objects. A
basic ruleset is provided with the Basic-Policy-Rules attribute basic ruleset is provided with the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules
Section 4.4. A reference to the extended ruleset is carried in Attribute Section 4.4. A reference to the extended ruleset is
Section 4.5. The format of these rules are described in [25] and carried in Section 4.5. The format of these rules are described
[26]. in [RFC4745] and [I-D.ietf-geopriv-policy].
Req. 11. (Limited Rule language): A limited (or basic) ruleset is Req. 11. (Limited Rule language): A limited (or basic) ruleset is
provided by the Policy-Information attribute Section 4.4 (and as provided by the Policy-Information Attribute Section 4.4 (and as
introduced with PIDF-LO [19]). introduced with PIDF-LO [RFC4119]).
Section 7.4 of [10] details the requirements of a "Location Object Section 7.4 of [RFC3693] details the requirements of a "Location
Privacy and Security". These requirements are listed below: Object Privacy and Security". These requirements are listed below:
Req. 12 (Identity Protection): Support for unlinkable pseudonyms is Req. 12 (Identity Protection): Support for unlinkable pseudonyms is
provided by the usage of a corresponding authentication and key provided by the usage of a corresponding authentication and key
exchange protocol. Such protocols are available, for example, exchange protocol. Such protocols are available, for example,
with the support of EAP as network access authentication methods. with the support of EAP as network access authentication methods.
Some EAP methods support passive user identity confidentiality Some EAP methods support passive user identity confidentiality
whereas others even support active user identity confidentiality. whereas others even support active user identity confidentiality.
This issue is further discussed in Section 7. The importance for This issue is further discussed in Section 7. The importance for
user identity confidentiality and identity protection has already user identity confidentiality and identity protection has already
been recognized as an important property (see, for example, a been recognized as an important property (see, for example, a
document on 'EAP Method Requirements for Wireless LANs' [36]). document on 'EAP Method Requirements for Wireless LANs'
[RFC4017]).
Req. 13. (Credential Requirements): As described in Section 7 Req. 13. (Credential Requirements): As described in Section 7
RADIUS signaling messages can be protected with IPsec. This RADIUS signaling messages can be protected with IPsec. This
allows a number of authentication and key exchange protocols to be allows a number of authentication and key exchange protocols to be
used as part of IKE, IKEv2 or KINK. used as part of IKE, IKEv2 or KINK.
Req. 14. (Security Features): Geopriv defines a few security Req. 14. (Security Features): Geopriv defines a few security
requirements for the protection of Location Objects, such as requirements for the protection of Location Objects, such as
mutual end-point authentication, data object integrity, data mutual end-point authentication, data object integrity, data
object confidentiality and replay protection. As described in object confidentiality and replay protection. As described in
skipping to change at page 58, line 5 skipping to change at page 62, line 40
Email: mark.jones@bridgewatersystems.com Email: mark.jones@bridgewatersystems.com
Avi Lior Avi Lior
Bridgewater Systems Corporation Bridgewater Systems Corporation
303 Terry Fox Drive 303 Terry Fox Drive
Ottawa, Ontario K2K 3J1 Ottawa, Ontario K2K 3J1
CANADA CANADA
Email: avi@bridgewatersystems.com Email: avi@bridgewatersystems.com
Bernard Aboba
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052
US
Email: bernarda@microsoft.com
Full Copyright Statement Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights. retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
 End of changes. 227 change blocks. 
586 lines changed or deleted 738 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.33. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/