draft-ietf-geopriv-radius-lo-24.txt   rfc5580.txt 
GEOPRIV H. Tschofenig, Ed. Network Working Group H. Tschofenig, Ed.
Internet-Draft Nokia Siemens Networks Request for Comments: 5580 Nokia Siemens Networks
Intended status: Standards Track F. Adrangi Category: Standards Track F. Adrangi
Expires: November 8, 2009 Intel Intel
M. Jones M. Jones
A. Lior A. Lior
Bridgewater Bridgewater
B. Aboba B. Aboba
Microsoft Corporation Microsoft Corporation
May 7, 2009 August 2009
Carrying Location Objects in RADIUS and Diameter Carrying Location Objects in RADIUS and Diameter
draft-ietf-geopriv-radius-lo-24.txt
Status of this Memo Abstract
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months This document describes procedures for conveying access-network
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any ownership and location information based on civic and geospatial
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference location formats in Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." (RADIUS) and Diameter.
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The distribution of location information is a privacy-sensitive task.
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. Dealing with mechanisms to preserve the user's privacy is important
and is addressed in this document.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at Status of This Memo
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on November 8, 2009. This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. and restrictions with respect to this document.
Abstract
This document describes procedures for conveying access network
ownership and location information based on a civic and geospatial
location format in Remote Authentication Dial In User Service
(RADIUS) and Diameter.
The distribution of location information is a privacy sensitive task.
Dealing with mechanisms to preserve the user's privacy is important
and addressed in this document.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1. Introduction ....................................................3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2. Terminology .....................................................3
3. Delivery Methods for Location Information . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. Delivery Methods for Location Information .......................3
3.1. Location Delivery based on Out-of-Band Agreements . . . . 6 3.1. Location Delivery Based on Out-of-Band Agreements ..........4
3.2. Location Delivery based on Initial Request . . . . . . . . 7 3.2. Location Delivery Based on Initial Request .................5
3.3. Location Delivery based on Mid-Session Request . . . . . . 8 3.3. Location Delivery Based on Mid-Session Request .............6
3.4. Location Delivery in Accounting Messages . . . . . . . . . 12 3.4. Location Delivery in Accounting Messages ..................10
4. Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 4. Attributes .....................................................11
4.1. Operator-Name Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 4.1. Operator-Name Attribute ...................................12
4.2. Location-Information Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4.2. Location-Information Attribute ............................14
4.3. Location-Data Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 4.3. Location-Data Attribute ...................................16
4.3.1. Civic Location Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.3.1. Civic Location Profile .............................17
4.3.2. Geospatial Location Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 4.3.2. Geospatial Location Profile ........................17
4.4. Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute . . . . . . . . . . 21 4.4. Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute .....................18
4.5. Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute . . . . . . . . . 23 4.5. Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute ..................20
4.6. Location-Capable Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 4.6. Location-Capable Attribute ................................21
4.7. Requested-Location-Info Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 4.7. Requested-Location-Info Attribute .........................23
5. Table of Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 5. Table of Attributes ............................................28
6. Diameter RADIUS Interoperability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 6. Diameter RADIUS Interoperability ...............................30
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 7. Security Considerations ........................................31
7.1. Communication Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 7.1. Communication Security ....................................31
7.2. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 7.2. Privacy Considerations ....................................32
7.2.1. RADIUS Client . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 7.2.1. RADIUS Client ......................................33
7.2.2. RADIUS Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 7.2.2. RADIUS Server ......................................34
7.2.3. RADIUS Proxy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 7.2.3. RADIUS Proxy .......................................34
7.3. Identity Information and Location Information . . . . . . 41 7.3. Identity Information and Location Information .............34
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 8. IANA Considerations ............................................36
8.1. New Registry: Operator Namespace Identifier . . . . . . . 43 8.1. New Registry: Operator Namespace Identifier ...............36
8.2. New Registry: Location Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 8.2. New Registry: Location Profiles ...........................37
8.3. New Registry: Location-Capable Attribute . . . . . . . . . 45 8.3. New Registry: Location-Capable Attribute ..................38
8.4. New Registry: Entity Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 8.4. New Registry: Entity Types ................................39
8.5. New Registry: Privacy Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 8.5. New Registry: Privacy Flags ...............................39
8.6. New Registry: Requested-Location-Info Attribute . . . . . 46 8.6. New Registry: Requested-Location-Info Attribute ...........39
9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 9. Acknowledgments ................................................40
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 10. References ....................................................42
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 10.1. Normative References .....................................42
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 10.2. Informative References ...................................42
Appendix A. Matching with Geopriv Requirements . . . . . . . . . 53 Appendix A. Matching with GEOPRIV Requirements ...................45
A.1. Distribution of Location Information at the User's A.1. Distribution of Location Information at the User's
Home Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Home Network ..............................................45
A.2. Distribution of Location Information at the Visited A.2. Distribution of Location Information at the Visited
Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Network ...................................................46
A.3. Requirements matching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 A.3. Requirements Matching .....................................47
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document defines attributes within RADIUS and Diameter that can This document defines attributes within RADIUS and Diameter that can
be used to convey location-related information within authentication be used to convey location-related information within authentication
and accounting exchanges. and accounting exchanges.
Location information may be useful in a number of scenarios. 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. In these situations, the home network may need broadband operators. In these situations, the home network may need
to know the location of the user, in order to enable location-aware to know the location of the user in order to enable location-aware
billing, location-aware authorization, or other location-aware billing, location-aware authorization, or other location-aware
services. Location information can also prove useful in other services. Location information can also prove useful in other
situations (such as wired networks) where operator network ownership situations (such as wired networks) where operator-network ownership
and location information may be needed by the home network. and location information may be needed by the home network.
In order to preserve user privacy, location information needs to be In order to preserve user privacy, location information needs to be
protected against unauthorized access and distribution. Requirements protected against unauthorized access and distribution. Requirements
for access to location information are defined in [RFC3693]. The for access to location information are defined in [RFC3693]. The
model includes a Location Generator (LG) that creates location model includes a Location Generator (LG) that creates location
information, a Location Server (LS) that authorizes access to information, a Location Server (LS) that authorizes access to
location information, a Location Recipient (LR) that requests and location information, a Location Recipient (LR) that requests and
receives information, and a Rule Maker (RM) that provides receives information, and a Rule Maker (RM) that provides
authorization policies to the LS which enforces access control authorization policies to the LS, which enforces access-control
policies on requests to location information. In Appendix A the policies on requests to location information. In Appendix A, the
requirements for a GEOPRIV Using Protocol are compared to the requirements for a GEOPRIV using protocol [RFC3693] are compared to
functionality provided by this document. the 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 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
RADIUS specific terminology is borrowed from [RFC2865] and [RFC2866]. 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 [RFC3693]. 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. In describing the usage scenarios, we assume that privacy RADIUS. In describing the usage scenarios, we assume that privacy
policies allow location to be conveyed in RADIUS; however, as noted policies allow location to be conveyed in RADIUS; however, as noted
in Section 6 similar exchanges can also take place within Diameter. in Section 6, similar exchanges can also take place within Diameter.
Privacy issues are discussed in Section 7.2. Privacy issues are discussed in 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, such as in RADIUS server is only applicable in certain environments, such as in
situations where the RADIUS client and server are within the same situations where the RADIUS client and server are within the same
administrative domain. The Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute is administrative domain. The Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute is
populated based on the defaults described in Section 4.4, unless it populated based on the defaults described in Section 4.4, unless it
has been explicitly configured otherwise. has been explicitly configured otherwise.
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
skipping to change at page 7, line 29 skipping to change at page 4, line 46
| | + Operator-Name | | | + Operator-Name |
| |----------------------------->| | |----------------------------->|
| | | | | |
| | 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 the RADIUS client provides a Location-Capable Attribute in the If the RADIUS client provides a Location-Capable Attribute in the
Access-Request, then the RADIUS server MAY request the RADIUS client Access-Request, then the RADIUS server MAY request location
for location information if it requires that information for information from the RADIUS client if it requires that information
authorization, and location information was not provided in Access- for authorization and if location information was not provided in the
Request. This exchange is shown in Figure 2. The inclusion of the Access-Request. This exchange is shown in Figure 2. The inclusion
Location-Capable Attribute in an Access-Request message indicates of the Location-Capable Attribute in an Access-Request message
that the NAS is capable of providing location data in response to an indicates that the NAS is capable of providing location data in
Access-Challenge. The subsequent Access-Challenge message sent from response to an Access-Challenge. The subsequent Access-Challenge
the RADIUS server to the NAS provides a hint regarding the type of message sent from the RADIUS server to the NAS provides a hint
desired location information attributes. The NAS treats the Basic- regarding the type of desired Location-Information Attributes. The
Location-Policy-Rules and Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes NAS treats the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules and Extended-Location-
as opaque data (e.g., it echoes these rules provided by the server Policy-Rules Attributes as opaque data (e.g., it echoes these rules
within the Access-Challenge back in the Access-Request). In the 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 attributes
subsequent Access-Request message. When evaluating this Access- are then provided in the subsequent Access-Request message. When
Request message the authorization procedure at the RADIUS server evaluating this Access-Request message, the authorization procedure
might be based on a number of criteria, including the newly defined at the RADIUS server might be based on a number of criteria,
attributes listed in Section 4. 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 | |
|---------------------->| | |---------------------->| |
skipping to change at page 8, line 34 skipping to change at page 6, line 34
| | | | | |
| | Access-Request | | | Access-Request |
| | + Location-Information | | | + Location-Information |
| | + Location-Data | | | + Location-Data |
| | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | | | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules |
| | + Extended-Location-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... :
: : : : : :
| | | | | |
| | 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 Request (CoA-Request) message and the CoA- Change-of-Authorization Request (CoA-Request) message and the CoA-NAK
NAK, defined in [RFC5176]. At any time during the session the (CoA-Negative Acknowledgement), defined in [RFC5176]. At any time
Dynamic Authorization Client MAY send a CoA-Request containing during the session, the Dynamic Authorization Client MAY send a CoA-
session identification attributes to the NAS (i.e., Dynamic Request containing session-identification attributes to the NAS
Authorization Server). (i.e., Dynamic Authorization Server).
In order to enable the on-demand mid-session location delivery In order to enable the on-demand, mid-session location-delivery
method, the RADIUS server MUST return an instance of the Requested- method, the RADIUS server MUST return an instance of the Requested-
Location-Info Attribute with the 'FUTURE_REQUESTS' flag set and Location-Info Attribute with the 'FUTURE_REQUESTS' flag set and
instances of the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules and Extended-Location- instances of the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules and Extended-Location-
Policy-Rules Attributes in the Access-Accept message for the session. Policy-Rules Attributes in the Access-Accept message for the session.
Upon receipt of a CoA-Request message containing a Service-Type Upon receipt of a CoA-Request message containing a Service-Type
Attribute with value "Authorize Only" for the same session, the NAS Attribute with value "Authorize Only" for the same session, the NAS
MUST include location information and echo the previously received MUST include location information and echo the previously received
Basic-Location-Policy-Rules and Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Basic-Location-Policy-Rules and Extended-Location-Policy-Rules
Attributes in the subsequent Access-Request message. Attributes in the subsequent Access-Request message.
skipping to change at page 10, line 8 skipping to change at page 8, line 8
| Access-Request | | | Access-Request | |
| + Location-Information | | | + Location-Information | |
| + Location-Data | | | + Location-Data | |
| + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | | | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Extended-Location-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... | :
: | : : | :
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| Access-Accept | | | Access-Accept | |
| + Requested-Location-Info | | | + Requested-Location-Info | |
(FUTURE_REQUESTS,...) | | (FUTURE_REQUESTS,...) | |
| + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | | | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | | | + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | |
|<-----------------------------------------------------------| |<-----------------------------------------------------------|
skipping to change at page 10, line 44 skipping to change at page 8, line 44
| + State | | | + State | |
| + Location-Information | | | + Location-Information | |
| + Location-Data | | | + Location-Data | |
| + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | | | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | | | + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | |
|----------------------------------------------------------->| |----------------------------------------------------------->|
| Access-Accept | | | Access-Accept | |
|<-----------------------------------------------------------| |<-----------------------------------------------------------|
| | | | | |
Figure 3: Location Delivery based on CoA with Service-Type 'Authorize Figure 3: Location Delivery Based on CoA with
Only' Service-Type 'Authorize Only'
When the Dynamic Authorization Client wants to change the values of When the Dynamic Authorization Client wants to change the values of
the requested location information, or set the values of the the requested location information, or set the values of the
requested location information for the first time, it may do so requested location information for the first time, it may do so
without triggering a reauthorization. Assuming that the NAS had without triggering a reauthorization. Assuming that the NAS had
previously sent an Access-Request containing a Location-Capable previously sent an Access-Request containing a Location-Capable
Attribute, the DAC can send a CoA-Request to the NAS without a Attribute, the Dynamic Authorization Client (DAC) can send a CoA-
Service-Type Attribute, but including the NAS Identifiers and Session Request to the NAS without a Service-Type Attribute, but include the
identifiers as per [RFC5176] and the Requested-Location-Info, Basic- NAS identifiers and session identifiers as per [RFC5176] and the
Location-Policy-Rules and Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes. Requested-Location-Info, Basic-Location-Policy-Rules, and Extended-
The Requested-Location-Info, Basic-Location-Policy-Rules and Location-Policy-Rules Attributes. The Requested-Location-Info,
Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes MUST NOT be used for Basic-Location-Policy-Rules, and Extended-Location-Policy-Rules
session identification. Attributes MUST NOT be used for session identification.
Figure 4 shows this approach graphically. Figure 4 shows this approach graphically.
+---------------+ +---------------+ +------+ +---------------+ +---------------+ +------+
| Dynamic | | Dynamic | |RADIUS| | Dynamic | | Dynamic | |RADIUS|
| Authorization | | Authorization | |Server| | Authorization | | Authorization | |Server|
| Server/NAS | | Client | | | | Server/NAS | | Client | | |
+---------------+ +---------------+ +------+ +---------------+ +---------------+ +------+
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
skipping to change at page 11, line 41 skipping to change at page 9, line 41
| Access-Request | | | Access-Request | |
| + Location-Information | | | + Location-Information | |
| + Location-Data | | | + Location-Data | |
| + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | | | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Extended-Location-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... | :
: | : : | :
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| Access-Accept | | | Access-Accept | |
| + Requested-Location-Info | | | + Requested-Location-Info | |
| + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | | | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | |
| + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | | | + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | |
|<-----------------------------------------------------------| |<-----------------------------------------------------------|
| | | | | |
skipping to change at page 12, line 22 skipping to change at page 10, line 22
| + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | | | + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | |
|<--------------------------------------------| | |<--------------------------------------------| |
| | | | | |
| CoA ACK | | | CoA ACK | |
|-------------------------------------------->| | |-------------------------------------------->| |
| | | | | |
: : : : : :
: <<Further exchanges later>> : : : <<Further exchanges later>> : :
: : : : : :
Figure 4: Location Delivery based on CoA 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-Location- accounting messages, then it needs to include a Requested-Location-
Info Attribute to the Access-Accept message. The Basic-Location- Info Attribute with the Access-Accept message. The Basic-Location-
Policy-Rules and the Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes are to Policy-Rules and the Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes are to
be echoed in the Accounting-Request if indicated in the Access- be echoed in the Accounting-Request if indicated in the Access-
Accept. Accept.
Figure 5 shows the message exchange. Figure 5 shows the message exchange.
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
| | | Network | | RADIUS | | | | Network | | RADIUS |
| User | | Access | | Server | | User | | Access | | Server |
| | | Server | | | | | | Server | | |
skipping to change at page 14, line 7 skipping to change at page 11, line 40
| |--------------------------------->| | |--------------------------------->|
| | | | | |
| | Accounting-Response | | | Accounting-Response |
| |<---------------------------------| | |<---------------------------------|
| | | | | |
Figure 5: Location Delivery in Accounting Messages Figure 5: Location Delivery in Accounting Messages
4. Attributes 4. Attributes
It is important to note that the location specific parts of the It is important to note that the location-specific parts of the
attributes defined below are not meant to be processed by the RADIUS attributes defined below are not meant to be processed by the RADIUS
server. Instead, a location server specific component used in server. Instead, a location-server-specific component used in
combination with the RADIUS server is responsible for receiving, combination with the RADIUS server is responsible for receiving,
processing and further distributing location information (in processing, and further distributing location information (in
combination with proper access control and privacy protection). As combination with proper access control and privacy protection). As
such, from a RADIUS server point of view location information is such, from a RADIUS server point of view, location information is
treated as opaque data. treated as opaque data.
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 text whose length
length MUST NOT exceed 253 bytes. 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:
To Be Assigned by IANA - Operator-Name 126 - Operator-Name
Length: Length:
>= 4 >= 4
Text: Text:
The format is shown below. The data type of this field is The format is shown below. The data type of this field is a text.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Namespace ID | Operator-Name ... | Namespace ID | Operator-Name ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Operator-Name ... | Operator-Name ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Namespace ID: Namespace ID:
The value within this field contains the The value within this field contains the operator namespace
operator namespace identifier. The Namespace ID value identifier. The Namespace ID value is encoded in ASCII.
is encoded in ASCII.
Example: '1' (0x31) 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
Access Network Operator Name. Operator Name. This field is a RADIUS-based data type of Text.
This field is a RADIUS base data type of Text.
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,
are listed below. Additional namespace identifiers must be which 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' (0x30)): 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, as Transferred Account Data Interchange Group (TADIG) codes, as
defined in [GSM]. TADIG codes are assigned by the TADIG Working defined in [GSM]. TADIG codes are assigned by the TADIG Working
Group within the GSM Association. The TADIG Code consists of two Group within the Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM)
fields, with a total length of five ASCII characters consisting of Association. The TADIG code consists of two fields, with a total
a three-character country code and a two-character alphanumeric length of five ASCII characters consisting of a three-character
operator (or company) ID. country code and a two-character alphanumeric operator (or
company) ID.
REALM ('1' (0x31)): 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
obtained coincident with acquiring the rights to use a particular are obtained coincident with acquiring the rights to use a
Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN). Since this operator is particular Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN). Since this
limited to ASCII, any registered domain name which contains non- operator is limited to ASCII, any registered domain name that
ASCII characters must be converted to ASCII. The Punycode contains non-ASCII characters must be converted to ASCII. The
encoding [RFC3492] is used for this purpose. Punycode encoding [RFC3492] is used for this purpose.
E212 ('2' (0x32)): 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 [ITU212]. The MCC/MCC values are assigned by the defined in [ITU212]. The MCC/MNC 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 by 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' (0x33)): 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 [ITU1400]. ICC values are assigned by national defined in [ITU1400]. ICC values are assigned by national
regulatory authorities and are coordinated by the regulatory authorities and are coordinated by the
Telecommunication Standardization Bureau (TSB) within the ITU Telecommunication Standardization Bureau (TSB) within the ITU
Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T). When using the Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T). When using the
ICC namespace, the attribute consists of three uppercase ASCII ICC namespace, the attribute consists of three uppercase ASCII
characters containing a three-letter alphabetic country code, as characters containing a three-letter alphabetic country code, as
defined in [ISO], followed by one to six uppercase alphanumeric defined in [ISO], followed by one to six uppercase alphanumeric
ASCII characters 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 the Access-Request
in Accounting-Request messages. For the Accounting-Request message message, the Accounting-Request message, both of these messages, or
the Acc-Status-Type may be set to Start, Interim or Stop. no message. For the Accounting-Request message, 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. determination method, etc.
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.) ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: Type:
To Be Assigned by IANA - Location-Information 127 - Location-Information
Length: Length:
>= 23 >= 23
String: String:
The format is shown below. The data type of this field is The format is shown below. The data type of this field is a
string. All fields are transmitted from left to right: string. 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 | Code | Entity | | Index | Code | Entity |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Sighting Time ~ | Sighting Time ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Sighting Time | | Sighting Time |
skipping to change at page 18, line 17 skipping to change at page 15, line 35
Index (16 bits): Index (16 bits):
The 16-bit unsigned integer value allows this attribute to provide The 16-bit unsigned integer value allows this attribute to provide
information relating to the information included in the Location- information relating to the information included in the Location-
Data Attribute to which it refers (via the Index). Data Attribute to which it refers (via the Index).
Code (8 bits): Code (8 bits):
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, a 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).
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. Location information can refer to unsigned 8-bit integer value. Location information can refer to
different entities. This document registers two entity values, different entities. This document registers two entity values,
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.
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.
Sighting Time (64 bits) Sighting Time (64 bits)
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 the content is
expressed in the 64 bit Network Time Protocol (NTP) timestamp expressed in the 64-bit Network Time Protocol (NTP) timestamp
format [RFC1305]. format [RFC1305].
Time-to-Live (64 bits): Time-to-Live (64 bits):
This field gives a hint until when location information should be This field gives a hint regarding for how long location
considered current. The data type of this field is a string and information should be considered current. The data type of this
the content is expressed in the 64 bit Network Time Protocol (NTP) field is a string and the content is expressed in the 64-bit
timestamp format [RFC1305]. Note that the time-to-live field is Network Time Protocol (NTP) timestamp format [RFC1305]. Note that
different than Retention Expires field used in the Basic-Location- the Time-to-Live field is different than the Retention Expires
Policy-Rules Attribute, see Section 4.4. Retention expires field used in the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute, see
indicates the time the recipient is no longer permitted to possess Section 4.4. The Retention Expires field indicates the time the
the location information. recipient is no longer permitted to possess the location
information.
Method (variable): Method (variable):
Describes the way that the location information was determined. Describes the way that the location information was determined.
This field MUST contain the value of exactly one IANA-registered This field MUST contain the value of exactly one IANA-registered
'method' token [RFC4119]. 'method' token [RFC4119].
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
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.
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.) ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: Type:
To Be Assigned by IANA - Location-Data 128 - Location-Data
Length: Length:
>= 5 >= 5
String: String:
The format is shown below. The data type of this field is The format is shown below. The data type of this field is a
string. All fields are transmitted from left to right: string. 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 this attribute to
the Location-Data Attribute with the associate the Location-Data Attribute with the Location-
Location-Information Attributes. 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.
profile. This document defines two location profiles. This document defines two location profiles. Details of the
Details of the location profiles is described below. location profiles are 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 [RFC4776] whereby the first encoding format defined in Section 3.1 of [RFC4776], whereby the
3 octets (i.e., the code for this DHCP option, the length of the DHCP first 3 octets are not put into the Location field of the above-
option, and the 'what' element are not included) are not put into the described RADIUS Location-Data Attribute (i.e., the code for the DHCP
Location field of the above-described RADIUS Location-Data Attribute. option, the length of the DHCP option, and the 'what' element are not
included).
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, and the format is based on the Location
Section 2 of RFC 3825 Location Configuration Information (LCI) format Configuration Information (LCI) format defined in Section 2 of
[RFC3825] starting with the third octet (i.e., the code for the DHCP [RFC3825] but starts with the third octet (i.e., the code for the
option and the length field is not included). DHCP option and the length field is not included).
4.4. Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute 4.4. Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute
The Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute MAY be sent in an Access- The Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute MAY be sent in Access-
Request, Access-Accept, an Access-Challenge, a Change-of- Request, Access-Accept, Access-Challenge, Change-of-Authorization,
Authorization and in an Accounting-Request message. and Accounting-Request messages.
Policy rules control the distribution of location information. The Policy rules control the distribution of location information. In
obligation with respect to understanding and processing of the Basic- order to understand and process the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules
Location-Policy-Rules Attribute for RADIUS clients is to utilize a Attribute, RADIUS clients are obligated to utilize a default value of
default value of Basic-Location-Policy-Rules unless explicitly Basic-Location-Policy-Rules, unless explicitly configured otherwise,
configured otherwise, and also for clients to echo the Basic- and to echo the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute that they
Location-Policy-Rules Attribute that they receive from a server. As receive from a server. As a default, the Note Well field does not
a default, the note-well field does not carry a pointer to human carry a pointer to human-readable privacy policies, the
readable privacy policies, the retransmission-allowed is set to zero retransmission-allowed is set to zero (0), i.e., further distribution
(0), i.e., further distribution is not allowed, and the retention- is not allowed, and the Retention Expires field is set to 24 hours.
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 [RFC4119] and encodes them in a non-XML format. Two fields in [RFC4119] and encodes those policies in a non-XML format. Two
('sighting time' and 'time-to-live') are additionally included in the fields ('Sighting Time' and 'Time-to-Live') are additionally included
Location-Information Attribute to conform to the GEOPRIV requirements in the Location-Information Attribute to conform to the GEOPRIV
[RFC3693], Section 2.7. requirements [RFC3693], Section 2.7.
The format of the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute is shown The format of the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute is shown
below. 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-Location-Policy-Rules 129 - Basic-Location-Policy-Rules
Length: Length:
>= 12 >= 12
String: String:
The format is shown below. The data type of this field is The format is shown below. The data type of this field is a
string. All fields are transmitted from left to right: string. 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Flags | Retention Expires ... | Flags | Retention Expires ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Retention Expires ... | Retention Expires ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Retention Expires | Note Well ... | Retention Expires | Note Well ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Note Well ... | Note Well ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
This document reuses fields of the RFC 4119 [RFC4119] 'usage-rules' This document reuses fields from the RFC 4119 [RFC4119] 'usage-rules'
element. These fields have the following meaning: element. These fields have the following meaning:
Flags (16 bits): Flags (16 bits):
The Flags field is a bit mask and only the first bit (R) is The Flags field is a bit mask. Only the first bit (R) is defined
defined in this document and corresponds to the retransmission- in this document, and it corresponds to the Retransmission Allowed
allowed field: field:
0 1 0 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|R|o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o| |R|o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
R = retransmission-allowed R = Retransmission Allowed
o = reserved. o = reserved.
All reserved bits MUST be zero. When the value of this field the All reserved bits MUST be zero. When the value of the Retransmission
retransmission-allowed field is set to zero (0), then the Allowed field is set to zero (0), then the recipient of this Location
recipient of this Location Object is not permitted to share the Object is not permitted to share the enclosed location information,
enclosed location information, or the object as a whole, with or the object as a whole, with other parties. The value of '1'
other parties. The value of '1' allows to share the location allows this attribute to share the location information with other
information with other parties by considering the extended policy parties by considering the extended policy rules.
rules.
Retention Expires (64 bits): Retention Expires (64 bits):
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 [RFC1305]. timestamp [RFC1305].
Note Well (variable): Note Well (variable):
This field contains a URI that points to human readable privacy This field contains a URI that points to human-readable privacy
instructions. The data type of this field is string. This field instructions. The data type of this field is a string. This
is useful when location information is distributed to third party field is useful when location information is distributed to third-
entities, which can include humans in a location based service. party entities, which can include humans in a location-based
RADIUS entities are not supposed to process this field. service. RADIUS entities are not supposed to process this field.
Whenever a Location Object leaves the RADIUS eco-system the URI in Whenever a Location Object leaves the RADIUS ecosystem, 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 [RFC4119]). The note-well field may be the PIDF-LO (Presence Information Data Format - Location Object)
empty. document (see [RFC4119]). The Note Well field may be empty.
4.5. Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute 4.5. Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute
The Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute MAY be sent in an The Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute MAY be sent in Access-
Access-Request, an Access-Accept, an Access-Challenge, an Access- Request, Access-Accept, Access-Challenge, Access-Reject, Change-of-
Reject, an Change-of-Authorization and in an Accounting-Request Authorization, and Accounting-Request messages.
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 [RFC4119] this field only contains a reference and does not from [RFC4119], this field only contains a reference and does not
carry an attached extended rule set. This modification is motivated carry an attached, extended ruleset. This modification is motivated
by the size limitations imposed by RADIUS. by the size limitations imposed by RADIUS.
Policy rules control the distribution of location information and, as In order to understand and process the Extended-Location-Policy-Rules
with the Basic Policy Rules Attribute the obligation with respect to Attribute, RADIUS clients are obligated to attach the URI to the
understanding and processing of the Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute when they are explicitly
Attribute for RADIUS clients is when they are explicitly configured configured to do so, and to echo the Extended-Location-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 or to parse the XML policies.
data at the URL specified in the attribute and to parse the XML
policies.
The format of the Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute is shown The format of the Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute is shown
below. 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 25, line 12 skipping to change at page 21, line 4
The format of the Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute is shown The format of the Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute is shown
below. 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-Location-Policy-Rules 130 - Extended-Location-Policy-Rules
Length: Length:
>= 3 >= 3
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
is shown below. The data type of this field is string. shown below. The data type of this field is a string. The fields
The fields are transmitted from left to right: 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 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 an 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 MUST NOT capable of sending location information. A RADIUS server MUST 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:
To Be Assigned by IANA - Location-Capable Attribute 131 - Location-Capable Attribute
Length: Length:
6 6
Integer: Integer:
The content of the Integer field encodes the The content of the Integer field encodes the requested
requested capabilities. capabilities. 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 client uses the CIVIC_LOCATION to indicate that it is The RADIUS client uses the CIVIC_LOCATION to indicate that it is
able to return civic location based on the location profile able to return civic location based on the location profile
defined in Section 4.3.1. defined in Section 4.3.1.
skipping to change at page 27, line 17 skipping to change at page 23, line 4
able to return geodetic location based on the location profile able to return geodetic location based on the location profile
defined in Section 4.3.2. defined in Section 4.3.2.
Numerical Value: Numerical Value:
A numerical value of this token 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 is able to provide a Location-Information attribute RADIUS client is able to provide a Location-Information Attribute
with the Entity attribute expressing the value of zero (0), i.e., with the Entity Attribute expressing the value of zero (0), i.e.,
the RADIUS client is capable of returning location information of the RADIUS client is capable of returning the location information
the user's client device. of the user's client device.
Numerical Value: Numerical Value:
A numerical value of this token 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 is able to provide a Location-Information attribute RADIUS client is able to provide a Location-Information Attribute
that contains location information with the Entity attribute that contains location information with the Entity Attribute
expressing the value of one (1), i.e., the RADIUS client is expressing the value of one (1), i.e., the RADIUS client is
capable of returning location information of the NAS. capable of returning the location information of the NAS.
Numerical Value: Numerical Value:
A numerical value of this token is '8'. A numerical value of this token is '8'.
4.7. Requested-Location-Info Attribute 4.7. Requested-Location-Info Attribute
The Requested-Location-Info Attribute allows the RADIUS server to The Requested-Location-Info Attribute allows the RADIUS server to
indicate what location information about which entity it wants to indicate which location information about which entity it wants to
receive. The latter aspect refers to the entities that are indicated receive. The latter aspect refers to the entities that are indicated
in the Entity field of the Location-Information Attribute. in the Entity field of the Location-Information Attribute.
The Requested-Location-Info Attribute MAY be sent in an Access- The Requested-Location-Info Attribute MAY be sent in an Access-
Accept, in an Access-Challenge, or a Change of Authorization packet. Accept, Access-Challenge, or 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
following cases need to be differentiated. If the RADIUS client and the following cases need to be differentiated. If the RADIUS client
the RADIUS server have agreed out-of-band to mandate the transfer of and the RADIUS server have agreed out-of-band to mandate the transfer
location information for every network access authentication request of location information for every network-access authentication
then the processing listed below is not applicable. request, 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-Location- it with the Access-Request message, then the Requested-Location-
Info Attribute is attached to the Access-Challenge with a hint Info Attribute is attached to the Access-Challenge with a hint
about what is required. about what is required.
o If the RADIUS server does not receive the requested information in o If the RADIUS server does not receive the requested information in
response to the Access-Challenge (including the Requested- response to the Access-Challenge (including the Requested-
Location-Info Attribute) then the RADIUS server may respond with Location-Info Attribute), then the RADIUS server may respond with
an Access-Reject message with an Error-Cause Attribute (including an Access-Reject message with an Error-Cause Attribute (including
the "Location-Info-Required" value). 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-Location-Info If the RADIUS server does not send a Requested-Location-Info
Attribute then the RADIUS client MUST NOT attach location information Attribute, then the RADIUS client MUST NOT attach location
to messages towards the RADIUS server. The user's authorization information to messages towards the RADIUS server. The user's
policies, if available, MUST be consulted by the RADIUS server before authorization policies, if available, MUST be consulted by the RADIUS
requesting location information delivery from the RADIUS client. server before requesting location information delivery from the
RADIUS client.
Figure 6 shows a simple protocol exchange where the RADIUS server Figure 6 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-Location-Info Attribute is attached to the Access-Challenge Requested-Location-Info Attribute is attached to the Access-
the RADIUS server indicates that location information is required for Challenge, the RADIUS server indicates that location information is
computing an authorization decision. required for computing an authorization decision.
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
| RADIUS | | RADIUS | | RADIUS | | RADIUS |
| Client | | Server | | Client | | Server |
+---------+ +---------+ +---------+ +---------+
| | | |
| | | |
| Access-Request | | Access-Request |
| + Location-Capable | | + Location-Capable |
| ('CIVIC_LOCATION', | | ('CIVIC_LOCATION', |
skipping to change at page 29, line 43 skipping to change at page 25, line 36
| | | |
| Access-Request | | Access-Request |
| + Location-Information | | + Location-Information |
| + Location-Data | | + Location-Data |
| + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules | | + Basic-Location-Policy-Rules |
| + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules | | + Extended-Location-Policy-Rules |
|--------------------------------->| |--------------------------------->|
| | | |
| .... | | .... |
Figure 6: RADIUS server requesting location information Figure 6: RADIUS Server Requesting Location Information
The Requested-Location-Info Attribute MUST be sent by the RADIUS The Requested-Location-Info Attribute MUST be sent by the RADIUS
server, in the absence of an out-of-band agreement, if it wants the server, in the absence of an out-of-band agreement, if it wants the
RADIUS client to return location information and if authorization RADIUS client to return location information and if authorization
policies permit it. This Requested-Location-Info Attribute MAY policies permit it. This Requested-Location-Info Attribute MAY
appear in the Access-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
skipping to change at page 30, line 12 skipping to change at page 26, line 4
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-Location-Info Attribute 132 - 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
requested information attributes. 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 the Requested-Location-Info Attribute with The RADIUS server uses the Requested-Location-Info Attribute with
skipping to change at page 31, line 29 skipping to change at page 27, line 12
A numerical value of this token 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 send 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 the USERS_LOCATION token and
value of zero (0) of the Entity attribute inside the Location- the 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 token 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 send 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 the NAS_LOCATION token and the value of one (1) of the
attribute inside the Location-Information attribute. A value of Entity Attribute inside the Location-Information Attribute. A
one indicates that the location information in the Location- value of one indicates that the location information in the
Information attribute refers to the RADIUS client. Location-Information Attribute refers to the RADIUS client.
Numerical Value: Numerical Value:
A numerical value of this token is '8'. A numerical value of this token is '8'.
Name: Name:
FUTURE_REQUESTS FUTURE_REQUESTS
Description: Description:
skipping to change at page 32, line 41 skipping to change at page 28, line 16
A numerical value of this token is '16'. A numerical value of this token is '16'.
Name: Name:
NONE NONE
Description: Description:
The RADIUS server uses this token to request that the RADIUS The RADIUS server uses this token to request that the RADIUS
client stops sending location information. client stop sending location information.
Numerical Value: Numerical Value:
A numerical value of this token is '32'. 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- CIVIC_LOCATION nor the GEO_LOCATION bit is set in the Requested-
Location-Info Attribute then no location information is returned. If Location-Info Attribute, then no location information is returned.
both the CIVIC_LOCATION and the GEO_LOCATION bits are set then the If both the CIVIC_LOCATION and the GEO_LOCATION bits are set, then
location information has to be put into separate attributes. The the location information has to be put into separate attributes. The
value of NAS_LOCATION and USERS_LOCATION refers to the location value of NAS_LOCATION and USERS_LOCATION refers to the location
information requested via CIVIC_LOCATION and via GEO_LOCATION. information requested via CIVIC_LOCATION and 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 the location information of the RADIUS
and the users' client device are returned in a geospatial location client and the users' client device are returned in a geospatial-
format. location 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 to which attributes may be found
which RADIUS messages, and in what quantity. in which RADIUS messages, and in what quantity.
Request Accept Reject Challenge Accounting # Attribute Request Accept Reject Challenge Accounting # Attribute
Request Request
0-1 0-1 0 0 0+ TBD Operator-Name 0-1 0-1 0 0 0+ 126 Operator-Name
0+ 0 0 0 0+ TBD Location-Information 0+ 0 0 0 0+ 127 Location-Information
0+ 0 0 0 0+ TBD Location-Data 0+ 0 0 0 0+ 128 Location-Data
0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 TBD Basic-Location- 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 129 Basic-Location-
Policy-Rules Policy-Rules
0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 TBD Extended-Location- 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 130 Extended-Location-
Policy-Rules Policy-Rules
0 0-1 0 0-1 0 TBD Requested-Location-Info 0-1 0 0 0 0 131 Location-Capable
0-1 0 0 0 0 TBD Location-Capable 0 0-1 0 0-1 0 132 Requested-Location-Info
0 0 0-1 0 0 101 Error-Cause [note1] 0 0 0-1 0 0 101 Error-Cause (*)
[note1] The Error-Cause attribute contains the value for the (*) Note: The Error-Cause Attribute contains the value for the
'Location-Info-Required' error. 'Location-Info-Required' error.
Change-of-Authorization Messages Change-of-Authorization Messages
Request ACK NAK # Attribute Request ACK NAK # Attribute
0-1 0 0 TBD Basic-Location-Policy-Rules 0-1 0 0 129 Basic-Location-Policy-Rules
0-1 0 0 TBD Extended-Location-Policy-Rules 0-1 0 0 130 Extended-Location-Policy-Rules
0-1 0 0 TBD Requested-Location-Info 0-1 0 0 132 Requested-Location-Info
Legend: 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 7: Table of Attributes Figure 7: Table of Attributes
The Error-Cause Attribute is defined in [RFC5176]. The Error-Cause Attribute is defined in [RFC5176].
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 ones listed in Figure 7. other than the ones listed in Figure 7.
This document requests IANA to allocate a new value from the Error- IANA allocated a new value (509) from the Error-Cause registry with
Cause registry with the semantic of 'Location-Info-Required'. the semantics 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 attribute-value pairs (AVPs) from the code
attribute compatibility space). No additional Diameter Code values space 1-255 (RADIUS attribute-compatibility space). No additional
are therefore allocated. The data types and flag rules, as defined Diameter code values are therefore allocated. The data types and
in [RFC3588], for the Diameter AVPs are as follows: flag rules, as defined in [RFC3588], for the Diameter AVPs are as
follows:
+---------------------+ +---------------------+
| AVP Flag rules | | AVP Flag rules |
+----+-----+------+-----+----+ +----+-----+------+-----+----+
| | |SHOULD| MUST| | | | |SHOULD| MUST| |
Attribute Name Value Type |MUST| MAY | NOT | NOT|Encr| Attribute Name Value Type |MUST| MAY | NOT | NOT|Encr|
+---------------------------------+----+-----+------+-----+----+ +---------------------------------+----+-----+------+-----+----+
|Operator-Name OctetString| | P | | V,M | Y | |Operator-Name OctetString| | P | | V,M | Y |
|Location-Information OctetString| | P | | V,M | Y | |Location-Information OctetString| | P | | V,M | Y |
|Location-Data OctetString| | P | | V,M | Y | |Location-Data OctetString| | P | | V,M | Y |
|Basic-Location- | | | | | | |Basic-Location- | | | | | |
| Policy-Rules OctetString| | P | | V,M | Y | | Policy-Rules OctetString| | P | | V,M | Y |
|Extended-Location- | | | | | | |Extended-Location- | | | | | |
| Policy-Rules OctetString| | P | | V,M | Y | | Policy-Rules OctetString| | P | | V,M | Y |
|Requested- | | | | | | |Requested- | | | | | |
| Location-Info OctetString| | P | | V,M | Y | | Location-Info OctetString| | P | | V,M | Y |
|Location-Capable OctetString| | P | | V,M | Y | |Location-Capable OctetString| | P | | V,M | Y |
+---------------------------------+----+-----+------+-----+----+ +---------------------------------+----+-----+------+-----+----+
The RADIUS attributes in this specification have no special The RADIUS attributes in this specification have no special
translation requirements for Diameter to RADIUS or RADIUS to Diameter translation requirements for Diameter-to-RADIUS or RADIUS-to-Diameter
gateways; they are copied as is, except for changes relating to gateways; they are copied as is, except for changes relating to
headers, alignment, and padding. See also Section 4.1 of [RFC3588] headers, alignment, and padding. See also Section 4.1 of [RFC3588]
and Section 9 of [RFC4005]. and 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 [RFC4005] or Diameter-EAP-Request [RFC4072]. What is said AA-Request [RFC4005] or Diameter-EAP-Request [RFC4072]. What is said
about Access-Challenge applies in Diameter to AA-Answer [RFC4005] or about Access-Challenge applies in Diameter to AA-Answer [RFC4005] or
Diameter-EAP-Answer [RFC4072] with Result-Code AVP set to Diameter-EAP-Answer [RFC4072] with the 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
[RFC4005]. [RFC4005].
What is said about Accounting-Request applies to Diameter Accounting- What is said about Accounting-Request applies in Diameter to
Request [RFC4005] as well. Accounting-Request [RFC4005] as well.
Note that these AVPs may be used by Diameter applications other than Note that these AVPs may be used by Diameter applications other than
RFC 4005 [RFC4005] and RFC 4072 [RFC4072]. The above-mentioned RFC 4005 [RFC4005] and RFC 4072 [RFC4072]. The above-mentioned
applications are, however, likely to be relevant in the context of applications are, however, likely to be relevant in the context of
this document. this document.
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 subsections.
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
[RFC3693], namely mutual end-point authentication, data object [RFC3693] -- namely, mutual end-point authentication, data object
integrity, 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 [RFC2865] 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 of dynamic key management. At the time of
writing, work is ongoing to address some shortcomings of [RFC2865] writing, work is ongoing to address some shortcomings of the
attribute security protection. [RFC2865] attribute regarding security protection.
o RADIUS over IPsec [RFC3579] enables the use of standard key o RADIUS over IPsec [RFC3579] enables the use of standard key-
management mechanisms, such as KINK, IKE and IKEv2 [RFC4306], to management mechanisms, such as Kerberized Internet Negotiation of
establish IPsec security associations. Confidentiality protection Keys (KINK), the Internet Key Exchange Protocol (IKE), and IKEv2
MUST be used to prevent eavesdropper gaining access to location [RFC4306], to establish IPsec security associations.
information. Confidentiality protection already present for other Confidentiality protection MUST be used to prevent an eavesdropper
reasons in many environments, such as for the transport of keying from gaining access to location information. Confidentiality
material in the context of EAP authentication and authorization. protection is already present for other reasons in many
Hence, this requirement is, in many environments, already environments, such as for the transport of keying material in the
fulfilled. Mutual authentication MUST be provided between context of Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) authentication
neighboring RADIUS entities to prevent man-in-the-middle attacks. and authorization. Hence, this requirement is, in many
Since mutual authentication is already required for key transport environments, already fulfilled. Mutual authentication MUST be
within RADIUS messages it does not represent a deployment provided between neighboring RADIUS entities to prevent man-in-
obstacle. Since IPsec protection is suggested as a mechanism to the-middle attacks. Since mutual authentication is already
protect RADIUS already no additional considerations need to be required for key transport within RADIUS messages, it does not
addressed beyond those described in [RFC3579]. represent a deployment obstacle. Since IPsec protection is
already suggested as a mechanism to protect RADIUS, no additional
considerations need to be addressed beyond those described in
[RFC3579].
In case that IPsec protection is not available for some reason and In case IPsec protection is not available for some reason and RADIUS-
RADIUS specific security mechanisms have to be used then the specific security mechanisms have to be used, then the following
following considerations apply. The Access-Request message is not considerations apply. The Access-Request message is not integrity
integrity protected. This would allow an adversary to change the protected. This would allow an adversary to change the contents of
contents of the Location Object or to insert, modify and delete the Location Object or to insert, modify, and delete attributes or
attributes or individual fields. To address these problems the individual fields. To address these problems, the Message-
Message-Authenticator (80) can be used to integrity protect the Authenticator (80) can be used to integrity protect the entire
entire Access-Request packet. The Message-Authenticator (80) is also 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)
MUST silently discard the packet if it does not match the value sent. and MUST silently discard the packet if it does not match the value
sent.
Access-Accept, including location attribute(s) without a Message- Access-Accept messages, including location attribute(s), without a
Authenticator(80) Attribute SHOULD be silently discarded by the NAS. Message-Authenticator (80) Attribute SHOULD be silently discarded by
A NAS supporting location attributes MUST calculate the correct value the NAS. An NAS supporting location attributes MUST calculate the
of a received Message-Authenticator(80) and MUST silently discard the correct value of a received Message-Authenticator (80) and MUST
packet if it does not match the value sent. silently discard the 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 either RADIUS or Diameter. Hence, some trust has to
to be placed on the RADIUS entities to behave according to the be placed on the RADIUS entities to behave according to the defined
defined rules. Furthermore, the RADIUS protocol does not involve the rules. Furthermore, the RADIUS protocol does not involve the user in
user in their protocol interaction except for tunneling their protocol interaction except for tunneling authentication
authentication information (such as EAP messages) through their information (such as EAP messages) through their infrastructure.
infrastructure. RADIUS and Diameter have even become a de-facto RADIUS and Diameter have even become a de facto protocol for key
protocol for key distribution for network access authentication distribution for network-access authentication applications. Hence,
applications. Hence, in the past there were some concerns about the in the past there were some concerns about the trust placed into the
trust placed into the infrastructure particularly from the security infrastructure -- particularly from the security area -- when it
area when it comes to keying. The EAP keying infrastructure is comes to keying. The EAP keying infrastructure is described in
described in [RFC4282]. [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
location of the user with a certain degree of precision depending on location of the user with a certain degree of precision, depending on
the location determination mechanism used, update frequency, the size the location-determination mechanism used, the update frequency, the
of the network and other factors, such as movement traces. size of the network, and other factors, such as movement traces.
Three types of use cases have to be differentiated: Three types of use cases have to be differentiated:
o RADIUS server does not want to receive location information from o The RADIUS server does not want to receive location information
the RADIUS client. from the RADIUS client.
o In case there is an out-of-band agreement between the entity o In case there is an out-of-band agreement between the entity
responsible for the NAS and the entity operating the RADIUS server responsible for the NAS and the entity operating the RADIUS
then location information may be sent without an explicit request server, location information may be sent without an explicit
from the RADIUS server. request from the RADIUS server.
o The RADIUS server dynamically requests location information from o The RADIUS server dynamically requests location information from
the NAS. the NAS.
7.2.1. RADIUS Client 7.2.1. RADIUS Client
The RADIUS client MUST behave according to the following guidelines: The RADIUS client MUST behave according to the following guidelines:
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-Location-Policy-Rules and o A RADIUS client MUST include Basic-Location-Policy-Rules and
Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes that are configured Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes that are configured
within an Access-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-
Location-Policy-Rules and Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Location-Policy-Rules and Extended-Location-Policy-Rules
Attributes unmodified within a subsequent Access-Request packet. Attributes unmodified within a subsequent Access-Request packet.
In addition, an Access-Request packet sent with a Service-Type In addition, an Access-Request packet sent with a Service-Type
value of "Authorize Only" MUST include Basic-Location-Policy-Rules value of "Authorize Only" MUST include the Basic-Location-Policy-
or Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes received in a Rules or Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Attributes that were
previous Access-Accept if the FUTURE_REQUESTS flag was set in the received in a previous Access-Accept if the FUTURE_REQUESTS flag
Requested-Location-Info Attribute. 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, 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 [RFC4745] that was extended for The Common Policy framework [RFC4745] that was extended for
geolocation privacy [I-D.ietf-geopriv-policy] are tailored for geolocation privacy [GEO-POLICY] is tailored for this purpose.
this purpose. The Extensible Markup Language (XML) Configuration The Extensible Markup Language (XML) Configuration Access Protocol
Access Protocol (XCAP) [RFC4825] gives users the ability to change (XCAP) [RFC4825] gives users the ability to change their privacy
their privacy policies using a standardized protocol. These policies using a standardized protocol. These policies are an
policies are an important tool for limiting further distribution important tool for limiting further distribution of the user's
of the user's location to other location based services. 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, Access-Reject, or Access-Challenge message when the RADIUS
RADIUS client is supposed to provide location information. 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 later billing processing),
then the RADIUS server MUST attach the privacy rules to location then the RADIUS server MUST attach the privacy rules to location
information. information.
7.2.3. RADIUS Proxy 7.2.3. RADIUS Proxy
A RADIUS proxy, behaving as a combined RADIUS client and RADIUS A RADIUS proxy, behaving as a combined RADIUS client and RADIUS
server, MUST follow the rules described in Section 7.2.1 and server, MUST follow the rules described in Sections 7.2.1 and 7.2.2.
Section 7.2.2.
7.3. Identity Information and Location Information 7.3. Identity Information and Location Information
For the envisioned usage scenarios, the identity of the user and his For the envisioned usage scenarios, the identity of the user and his
device is tightly coupled to the transfer of location information. device is tightly coupled to the transfer of location information.
If the identity can be determined by the visited network or RADIUS If the identity can be determined by the visited network or RADIUS
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 the 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 Media Access Control (MAC)
address on such an address. This enables the correlation of the address or base its IP address on such an address. This enables
particular device to its different locations. Techniques exist to the correlation of the particular device to its different
avoid the use of an IP address that is based on MAC address locations. Techniques exist to avoid the use of an IP address
[RFC3041]. Some link layers make it possible to avoid MAC that is based on a MAC address [RFC4941]. Some link layers make
addresses or change them dynamically. it possible to avoid MAC addresses or change them dynamically.
o Network access authentication procedures, such as PPP CHAP o Network-access authentication procedures, such as the PPP
[RFC1994] or EAP [RFC4282], may reveal the user's identity as a Challenge Handshake Authentication Protocol (CHAP) [RFC1994] or
part of the authentication procedure. Techniques exist to avoid EAP [RFC4187], may reveal the user's identity as a part of the
this problem in EAP methods, for instance by employing private authentication procedure. Techniques exist to avoid this problem
Network Access Identifiers (NAIs) in the EAP Identity Response in EAP methods, for instance by employing private Network Access
message [RFC4187] and by method-specific private identity exchange Identifiers (NAIs) [RFC4282] in the EAP Identity Response message
in the EAP method (e.g., [RFC4187], [RFC5281] and by method-specific private identity exchanges in the EAP
[I-D.josefsson-pppext-eap-tls-eap], [RFC5106]). Support for method (e.g., [RFC4187], [RFC5281], [PEAP], and [RFC5106]).
identity privacy within CHAP is not available. 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 one in a manner that makes it possible to either identify the user
at least correlate his session with other sessions, such as the or at least correlate his session with other sessions, such as the
use of static data in a Class Attribute [RFC2865] or in some use of static data in a Class Attribute [RFC2865] or in some
accounting attribute usage scenarios [RFC4372]. 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,
is necessary to prevent leakage of identity information from all it is necessary to prevent leakage of identity information from all
sources, not just one. sources, not just one.
Unfortunately, most users are not educated about the importance of Unfortunately, most users are not educated about the importance of
identity confidentiality and some protocols lack support for identity identity confidentiality, and some protocols lack support for
privacy mechanisms. This problem is made worse by the fact that identity-privacy mechanisms. This problem is made worse by the fact
users may be unable to choose particular protocols, as the choice is that users may be unable to choose particular protocols, as the
often dictated by the type of network operator they use, by the type choice is often dictated by the type of network operator they use,
of network they wish to access, the kind of equipment they have, or the type of network they wish to access, the kind of equipment they
the type of authentication method they are using. have, or the type of authentication method they are using.
A scenario where the user is attached to the home network is, from a A scenario where the user is attached to the home network is, from a
privacy point of view, simpler than a scenario where a user roams privacy point of view, simpler than a scenario where a user roams
into a visited network since the NAS and the home RADIUS server are into a visited network, since the NAS and the home RADIUS server are
in the same administrative domain. No direct relationship between in the same administrative domain. No direct relationship between
the visited and the home network operator may be available and some the visited and the home network operator may be available, and some
RADIUS brokers need to be consulted. With subscription-based network RADIUS brokers need to be consulted. With subscription-based network
access as used today the user has a contractual relationship with the access as used today, the user has a contractual relationship with
home network provider that could (theoretically) allow higher privacy the home network provider that could (theoretically) allow higher
considerations to be applied (including policy rules stored at the privacy considerations to be applied (including policy rules stored
home network itself for the purpose of restricting further at the home network itself, for the purpose of restricting further
distribution). distribution).
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 Attribute Types and Attribute Values defined in this document
defined in this document be registered by the Internet Assigned have been registered by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
Numbers Authority (IANA) from the RADIUS name spaces as described in (IANA) from the RADIUS namespaces as described in the "IANA
the "IANA Considerations" section of RFC 3575 [RFC3575], in Considerations" section of RFC 3575 [RFC3575], in accordance with BCP
accordance with BCP 26 [RFC2434]. Additionally, the Attribute Type 26 [RFC5226]. Additionally, the Attribute Type has been registered
should be registered in the Diameter name space. For RADIUS in the Diameter namespace. For RADIUS attributes and registries
attributes and registries created by this document IANA is requested created by this document, IANA placed them in the Radius Types
to place them at http://www.iana.org/assignments/radius-types. registry.
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-Location-Policy-Rules Basic-Location-Policy-Rules
Extended-Location-Policy-Rules Extended-Location-Policy-Rules
Location-Capable Location-Capable
Requested-Location-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 IANA has also assigned a new value (509) for the Error-Cause
Error-Cause Attribute [RFC5176], of "Location-Info-Required". Attribute [RFC5176] of "Location-Info-Required" according to this
document.
Additionally, IANA is requested to create the following new Additionally, IANA created the following new registries listed in the
registries listed in the subsections below. 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 or place any values within namespaces.
IANA is requested to add the following values to the operator IANA added the following values to the Operator Namespace Identifier
namespace identifier registry using a numerical identifier (allocated registry using a numerical identifier (allocated in sequence), a
in sequence), a token for the operator namespace and a contact person token for the operator namespace, and a contact person for the
for the registry. registry.
+----------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ +----------+--------------------+------------------------------------+
|Identifier| Operator Namespace | Contact Person | |Identifier| Operator Namespace | Contact Person |
| | Token | | | | Token | |
+----------+--------------------+------------------------------------+ +----------+--------------------+------------------------------------+
| 0x30 | TADIG | TD.13 Coordinator | | 0x30 | TADIG | TD.13 Coordinator |
| | | (td13@gsm.org) | | | | (td13@gsm.org) |
| 0x31 | REALM | IETF O&M Area Directors | | 0x31 | REALM | IETF O&M Area Directors |
| | | (ops-ads@ietf.org) | | | | (ops-ads@ietf.org) |
| 0x32 | E212 | ITU Director | | 0x32 | E212 | ITU Director |
| | | (tsbdir@itu.int) | | | | (tsbdir@itu.int) |
| 0x33 | 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 or hex 0x30), '1' (decimal 49, or hex 0x31), '2' (decimal (decimal 48 or hex 0x30), '1' (decimal 49, or hex 0x31), '2' (decimal
50, or hex 0x32) and '3' (decimal 51, or hex 0x33). This encoding 50, or hex 0x32), and '3' (decimal 51, or hex 0x33). This encoding
was chosen to simplify parsing. was chosen to simplify parsing.
Requests to IANA for a new value for a Namespace ID, i.e., values Requests to IANA for a new value for a Namespace ID, i.e., values
from 0x34 to 0xFE, will be approved by Expert Review. A designated from 0x34 to 0xFE, will be approved by Expert Review. A designated
expert will be appointed by the IESG. expert will be appointed by the IESG.
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 a Namespace ID because one is
is already up and running, or whether the REALM identifier plus the already up and running, or whether the REALM identifier plus the name
name should recommended to the requester. In addition, the Expert should be 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 whenever
new one is registered. a 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 an 8-bit integer value. Two values, zero and
are defined in this document, namely: one, 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 [RFC3575] the available bits with a Following the policies outlined in [RFC3575], the available bits with
description of their semantic will be assigned after the expert a description of their semantics will be assigned after the Expert
review process. Updates can be provided based on expert approval Review process. Updates can be provided based on expert approval
only. Based on expert approval it is possible to mark entries as only. Based on expert approval, it is possible to mark entries as
"deprecated". A designated expert will be appointed by the IESG. "deprecated". A designated expert will be appointed by the IESG.
Each registration must include the value and the corresponding Each registration must include the value and the corresponding
semantic of the defined location profile. semantics 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 5 bits are defined by this bit map. 32 bits are available, from which 4 bits are defined by this
document. This document creates a new IANA registry for the document. This document creates a new IANA registry for the
Requested-Location-Info Attribute. IANA is requested to add the Location-Capable Attribute. IANA added the following values to this
following values to this registry: 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 |
+----------+----------------------+ +----------+----------------------+
Following the policies outline in [RFC3575] the available bits with a Following the policies outlined in [RFC3575], the available bits with
description of their semantic will be assigned after the expert a description of their semantics will be assigned after the Expert
review process. Updates can be provided based on expert approval Review process. Updates can be provided based on expert approval
only. Based on expert approval it is possible to mark entries as only. Based on expert approval, it is possible to mark entries as
"deprecated". A designated expert will be appointed by the IESG. "deprecated". A designated expert will be appointed by the IESG.
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-Location- representing a bit in the bit-string of the Requested-Location-
Info Attribute. Info Attribute.
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 [RFC3575] the available bits with a Following the policies outlined in [RFC3575], the available bits with
description of their semantic will be assigned after the expert a description of their semantics will be assigned after the Expert
review process. Updates can be provided based on expert approval Review process. Updates can be provided based on expert approval
only. Based on expert approval it is possible to mark entries as only. Based on expert approval, it is possible to mark entries as
"deprecated". A designated expert will be appointed by the IESG. "deprecated". A designated expert will be appointed by the IESG.
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-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute that Section 4.4 defines the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules Attribute that
contains flags indicating privacy settings. 16 bits are available contains flags indicating privacy settings. 16 bits are available,
whereby a single bit, bit (0), indicating 'retransmission allowed' is from which a single bit, bit (0), indicating 'retransmission allowed'
defined by this document. Bits 1-15 are reserved for future use. is defined by this document. Bits 1-15 are reserved for future use.
Following the policies outline in [RFC3575] the available bits with a Following the policies outline in [RFC3575], the available bits with
description of their semantic will be assigned after the expert a description of their semantics will be assigned after the Expert
review process. Updates can be provided based on expert approval Review process. Updates can be provided based on expert approval
only. Based on expert approval it is possible to mark entries as only. Based on expert approval, it is possible to mark entries as
"deprecated". A designated expert will be appointed by the IESG. "deprecated". A designated expert will be appointed by the IESG.
Each registration must include the bit position and the semantic of Each registration must include the bit position and the semantics of
the bit. the bit.
8.6. New Registry: Requested-Location-Info Attribute 8.6. New Registry: Requested-Location-Info Attribute
Section 4.7 defines the Requested-Location-Info Attribute that Section 4.7 defines the Requested-Location-Info Attribute that
contains a bit map. 32 bits are available whereby a 5 bits are contains a bit map. 32 bits are available, from which 6 bits are
defined by this document. This document creates a new IANA registry defined by this document. This document creates a new IANA registry
for the Requested-Location-Info Attribute. IANA is requested to add for the Requested-Location-Info Attribute. IANA added the following
the following values to this registry: 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 | | 32 | NONE |
+----------+----------------------+ +----------+----------------------+
The semantic of these values is defined in Section 4.7. The semantics of these values are defined in Section 4.7.
Following the policies outline in [RFC3575] new Capability Tokens Following the policies outlined in [RFC3575], new Capability Tokens,
with a description of their semantic for usage with the Requested- with a description of their semantics for usage with the Requested-
Location-Info Attribute will be assigned after the expert review Location-Info Attribute, will be assigned after the Expert Review
process. Updates can be provided based on expert approval only. process. Updates can be provided based on expert approval only.
Based on expert approval it is possible to mark entries as Based on expert approval, it is possible to mark entries as
"deprecated". A designated expert will be appointed by the IESG. "deprecated". A designated expert will be appointed by the IESG.
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-Location- representing a bit in the bit-string of the Requested-Location-
Info Attribute. Info Attribute.
9. Acknowledgments 9. 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 document 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 document. The geospatial location-information format
based on work done by James Polk, John Schnizlein and Marc Linsner. is based on work done by James Polk, John Schnizlein, and Marc
The authorization policy format is based on the work done by Jon Linsner. The authorization policy format is based on the work done
Peterson. by Jon Peterson.
The authors would like to thank Victor Lortz, Anthony Leibovitz, Jose The authors would like to thank Victor Lortz, Anthony Leibovitz, Jose
Puthenkulam, Bernrad Aboba, Jari Arkko, Parviz Yegani, Serge Manning, Puthenkulam, Bernrad Aboba, Jari Arkko, Parviz Yegani, Serge Manning,
Kuntal Chowdury, Pasi Eronen, Blair Bullock and Eugene Chang for Kuntal Chowdury, Pasi Eronen, Blair Bullock and Eugene Chang for
their feedback to an initial version of this draft. We would like to their feedback to an initial version of this document. We would like
thank Jari Arkko for his text contributions. Lionel Morand provided to thank Jari Arkko for his textual contributions. Lionel Morand
detailed feedback on numerous issues. His comments helped to improve provided detailed feedback on numerous issues. His comments helped
the quality of this document. Jouni Korhonen, Victor Fajardo, Tolga to improve the quality of this document. Jouni Korhonen, Victor
Asveren and John Loughney helped us with the Diameter RADIUS Fajardo, Tolga Asveren, and John Loughney helped us with the Diameter
interoperability section. Andreas Pashalidis reviewed a later RADIUS interoperability section. Andreas Pashalidis reviewed a later
version document and provided a number of comments. Alan DeKok, version document and provided a number of comments. Alan DeKok,
Lionel Morand, Jouni Korhonen, David Nelson and Emile van Bergen Lionel Morand, Jouni Korhonen, David Nelson, and Emile van Bergen
provided guidance on the Requested-Location-Info Attribute and provided guidance on the Requested-Location-Info Attribute and
participated in the capability exchange discussions. Allison Mankin, participated in the capability-exchange discussions. Allison Mankin,
Jouni Korhonen and Pasi Eronen provided text for the operator Jouni Korhonen, and Pasi Eronen provided text for the Operator
namespace identifier registry. Jouni Korhonen interacted with the Namespace Identifier registry. Jouni Korhonen interacted with the
GSMA to find a contact person for the TADIG operator namespace and GSMA to find a contact person for the TADIG operator namespace, and
Scott Bradner consulted the ITU-T to find a contact person for the Scott Bradner consulted the ITU-T to find a contact person for the
E212 and the ICC operator namespace. 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, and Jon Peterson for their time discussing a
of issues with us. We thank Stephen Hayes for aligning this work number of issues with us. We thank Stephen Hayes for aligning this
with 3GPP activities. work with 3GPP activities.
We would like to thank members of the Wimax Forum Global Roaming We would like to thank members of the Wimax Forum Global Roaming
Working Group (GRWG) for their feedback on the Operator-Name Working Group (GRWG) for their feedback on the Operator-Name
attribute. Ray Jong Kiem helped us with his detailed description to attribute. Ray Jong Kiem helped us with his detailed description to
correct the document. correct the document.
The RADEXT working group chairs, David Nelson and Bernard Aboba, The RADEXT Working Group chairs, David Nelson and Bernard Aboba,
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 Dan Romascanu, Glen Zorn, Russ Finally, we would like to thank Dan Romascanu, Glen Zorn, Russ
Housley, Jari Arkko, Ralph Droms, Adrial Farrel, Tim Polk, and Lars Housley, Jari Arkko, Ralph Droms, Adrial Farrel, Tim Polk, and Lars
Eggert for the IETF Last Call comments, Derek Atkins for his security Eggert for the IETF Last Call comments; Derek Atkins for his security
area directorate review and Yoshiko Chong for spotting a bug in the area directorate review; and Yoshiko Chong for spotting a bug in the
IANA consideration section. IANA Considerations section.
10. References 10. References
10.1. Normative References 10.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
October 1998.
[RFC2865] Rigney, C., Willens, S., Rubens, A., and W. Simpson, [RFC2865] Rigney, C., Willens, S., Rubens, A., and W. Simpson,
"Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", "Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)",
RFC 2865, June 2000. RFC 2865, June 2000.
[RFC3492] Costello, A., "Punycode: A Bootstring encoding of Unicode [RFC3492] Costello, A., "Punycode: A Bootstring encoding of
for Internationalized Domain Names in Applications Unicode for Internationalized Domain Names in
(IDNA)", RFC 3492, March 2003. Applications (IDNA)", RFC 3492, March 2003.
[RFC3575] Aboba, B., "IANA Considerations for RADIUS (Remote [RFC3575] Aboba, B., "IANA Considerations for RADIUS (Remote
Authentication Dial In User Service)", RFC 3575, Authentication Dial In User Service)", RFC 3575,
July 2003. July 2003.
[RFC3588] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J. [RFC3588] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and
Arkko, "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, September 2003. J. Arkko, "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588,
September 2003.
[RFC3825] Polk, J., Schnizlein, J., and M. Linsner, "Dynamic Host [RFC3825] Polk, J., Schnizlein, J., and M. Linsner, "Dynamic Host
Configuration Protocol Option for Coordinate-based Configuration Protocol Option for Coordinate-based
Location Configuration Information", RFC 3825, July 2004. Location Configuration Information", RFC 3825,
July 2004.
[RFC4776] Schulzrinne, H., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol [RFC4776] Schulzrinne, H., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
(DHCPv4 and DHCPv6) Option for Civic Addresses (DHCPv4 and DHCPv6) Option for Civic Addresses
Configuration Information", RFC 4776, November 2006. Configuration Information", RFC 4776, November 2006.
[RFC5176] Chiba, M., Dommety, G., Eklund, M., Mitton, D., and B. [RFC5176] Chiba, M., Dommety, G., Eklund, M., Mitton, D., and B.
Aboba, "Dynamic Authorization Extensions to Remote Aboba, "Dynamic Authorization Extensions to Remote
Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", RFC 5176, Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)",
January 2008. RFC 5176, January 2008.
10.2. Informative References [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing
an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 5226, May 2008.
[GMLv3] "Open Geography Markup Language (GML) Implementation 10.2. Informative References
Specification", OGC 02-023r4,
http://www.opengis.org/techno/implementation.htm", ,
January 2003.
[GSM] "TADIG Naming Conventions, Version 4.1", GSM Association [GEO-POLICY] Schulzrinne, H., Tschofenig, H., Morris, J., Cuellar,
Official Document TD.13", , June 2006. J., and J. Polk, "Geolocation Policy: A Document Format
for Expressing Privacy Preferences for Location
Information", Work in Progress, February 2009.
[I-D.ietf-geopriv-policy] [GMLv3] "Open Geography Markup Language (GML) Implementation
Schulzrinne, H., Tschofenig, H., Morris, J., Cuellar, J., Specification", OGC 02-023r4, January 2003,
and J. Polk, "Geolocation Policy: A Document Format for <http://www.opengis.org/techno/implementation.htm>.
Expressing Privacy Preferences for Location Information",
draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-20 (work in progress),
February 2009.
[I-D.josefsson-pppext-eap-tls-eap] [GSM] "TADIG Naming Conventions", Version 4.1, GSM
Josefsson, S., Palekar, A., Simon, D., and G. Zorn, Association Official Document TD.13, June 2006.
"Protected EAP Protocol (PEAP) Version 2",
draft-josefsson-pppext-eap-tls-eap-10 (work in progress),
October 2004.
[ISO] "Codes for the representation of names of countries and [ISO] "Codes for the representation of names of countries and
their subdivisions - Part 1: Country codes, ISO 3166-1", their subdivisions - Part 1: Country codes",
, 1997. ISO 3166-1, 1997.
[ITU1400] "Designations for interconnections among operators' [ITU1400] "Designations for interconnections among operators'
networks, ITU-T Recommendation M.1400", , January 2004. networks", ITU-T Recommendation M.1400, January 2004.
[ITU212] "The international identification plan for mobile [ITU212] "The international identification plan for mobile
terminals and mobile users, ITU-T Recommendation E.212", terminals and mobile users", ITU-T
, May 2004. Recommendation E.212, May 2004.
[PEAP] Josefsson, S., Palekar, A., Simon, D., and G. Zorn,
"Protected EAP Protocol (PEAP) Version 2", Work
in Progress, October 2004.
[RFC1305] Mills, D., "Network Time Protocol (Version 3) [RFC1305] Mills, D., "Network Time Protocol (Version 3)
Specification, Implementation", RFC 1305, March 1992. Specification, Implementation", RFC 1305, March 1992.
[RFC1994] Simpson, W., "PPP Challenge Handshake Authentication [RFC1994] Simpson, W., "PPP Challenge Handshake Authentication
Protocol (CHAP)", RFC 1994, August 1996. Protocol (CHAP)", RFC 1994, August 1996.
[RFC2866] Rigney, C., "RADIUS Accounting", RFC 2866, June 2000. [RFC2866] Rigney, C., "RADIUS Accounting", RFC 2866, June 2000.
[RFC3041] Narten, T. and R. Draves, "Privacy Extensions for [RFC3579] Aboba, B. and P. Calhoun, "RADIUS (Remote
Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6", RFC 3041, Authentication Dial In User Service) Support For
January 2001. Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP)", RFC 3579,
September 2003.
[RFC3579] Aboba, B. and P. Calhoun, "RADIUS (Remote Authentication
Dial In User Service) Support For Extensible
Authentication Protocol (EAP)", RFC 3579, September 2003.
[RFC3693] Cuellar, J., Morris, J., Mulligan, D., Peterson, D., and [RFC3693] Cuellar, J., Morris, J., Mulligan, D., Peterson, J.,
D. Polk, "Geopriv Requirements", RFC 3693, February 2004. and J. Polk, "Geopriv Requirements", RFC 3693,
February 2004.
[RFC4005] Calhoun, P., Zorn, G., Spence, D., and D. Mitton, [RFC4005] Calhoun, P., Zorn, G., Spence, D., and D. Mitton,
"Diameter Network Access Server Application", RFC 4005, "Diameter Network Access Server Application", RFC 4005,
August 2005. August 2005.
[RFC4017] Stanley, D., Walker, J., and B. Aboba, "Extensible [RFC4017] Stanley, D., Walker, J., and B. Aboba, "Extensible
Authentication Protocol (EAP) Method Requirements for Authentication Protocol (EAP) Method Requirements for
Wireless LANs", RFC 4017, March 2005. Wireless LANs", RFC 4017, March 2005.
[RFC4072] Eronen, P., Hiller, T., and G. Zorn, "Diameter Extensible [RFC4072] Eronen, P., Hiller, T., and G. Zorn, "Diameter
Authentication Protocol (EAP) Application", RFC 4072, Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) Application",
August 2005. RFC 4072, August 2005.
[RFC4119] Peterson, J., "A Presence-based GEOPRIV Location Object [RFC4119] Peterson, J., "A Presence-based GEOPRIV Location Object
Format", RFC 4119, December 2005. Format", RFC 4119, December 2005.
[RFC4187] Arkko, J. and H. Haverinen, "Extensible Authentication [RFC4187] Arkko, J. and H. Haverinen, "Extensible Authentication
Protocol Method for 3rd Generation Authentication and Key Protocol Method for 3rd Generation Authentication and
Agreement (EAP-AKA)", RFC 4187, January 2006. Key Agreement (EAP-AKA)", RFC 4187, January 2006.
[RFC4282] Aboba, B., Beadles, M., Arkko, J., and P. Eronen, "The [RFC4282] Aboba, B., Beadles, M., Arkko, J., and P. Eronen, "The
Network Access Identifier", RFC 4282, December 2005. Network Access Identifier", RFC 4282, December 2005.
[RFC4306] Kaufman, C., "Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol", [RFC4306] Kaufman, C., "Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol",
RFC 4306, December 2005. RFC 4306, December 2005.
[RFC4372] Adrangi, F., Lior, A., Korhonen, J., and J. Loughney, [RFC4372] Adrangi, F., Lior, A., Korhonen, J., and J. Loughney,
"Chargeable User Identity", RFC 4372, January 2006. "Chargeable User Identity", RFC 4372, January 2006.
[RFC4745] Schulzrinne, H., Tschofenig, H., Morris, J., Cuellar, J., [RFC4745] Schulzrinne, H., Tschofenig, H., Morris, J., Cuellar,
Polk, J., and J. Rosenberg, "Common Policy: A Document J., Polk, J., and J. Rosenberg, "Common Policy: A
Format for Expressing Privacy Preferences", RFC 4745, Document Format for Expressing Privacy Preferences",
February 2007. RFC 4745, February 2007.
[RFC4825] Rosenberg, J., "The Extensible Markup Language (XML) [RFC4825] Rosenberg, J., "The Extensible Markup Language (XML)
Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP)", RFC 4825, May 2007. Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP)", RFC 4825,
May 2007.
[RFC5106] Tschofenig, H., Kroeselberg, D., Pashalidis, A., Ohba, Y., [RFC4941] Narten, T., Draves, R., and S. Krishnan, "Privacy
and F. Bersani, "The Extensible Authentication Protocol- Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in
Internet Key Exchange Protocol version 2 (EAP-IKEv2) IPv6", RFC 4941, September 2007.
Method", RFC 5106, February 2008.
[RFC5281] Funk, P. and S. Blake-Wilson, "Extensible Authentication [RFC5106] Tschofenig, H., Kroeselberg, D., Pashalidis, A., Ohba,
Protocol Tunneled Transport Layer Security Authenticated Y., and F. Bersani, "The Extensible Authentication
Protocol Version 0 (EAP-TTLSv0)", RFC 5281, August 2008. Protocol-Internet Key Exchange Protocol version 2 (EAP-
IKEv2) Method", RFC 5106, February 2008.
Appendix A. Matching with Geopriv Requirements [RFC5281] Funk, P. and S. Blake-Wilson, "Extensible
Authentication Protocol Tunneled Transport Layer
Security Authenticated Protocol Version 0 (EAP-
TTLSv0)", RFC 5281, August 2008.
This section compares the requirements for a GEOPRIV Using Protocol, Appendix A. Matching with GEOPRIV Requirements
This section compares the requirements for a GEOPRIV using protocol,
described in [RFC3693], 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 Appendices A.1 and 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
RADIUS server then it might subsequently be made available for RADIUS server, then it might subsequently be made available for
different purposes. This section discusses the privacy implication different purposes. This section discusses the privacy implications
for making location information available to other entities. for making location information available to other entities.
To use a more generic scenario we assume that the visited RADIUS and To use a more generic scenario, we assume that the visited RADIUS and
the home RADIUS server belong to different administrative domains. the home RADIUS server belong to different administrative domains.
The Location Recipient obtains location information about a The Location Recipient obtains location information about a
particular Target via protocols specified outside the scope of this particular Target via protocols specified outside the scope of this
document (e.g., SIP, HTTP or an API). document (e.g., SIP, HTTP, or an API).
The subsequent figure shows the interacting entities graphically. The subsequent figure shows the interacting entities graphically.
visited network | home network visited network | home network
| |
| +----------+ | +----------+
| | Rule | | | Rule |
| | Holder | | | Holder |
| +----+-----+ | +----+-----+
| | | |
skipping to change at page 54, line 9 skipping to change at page 46, line 9
E.g., NAS RADIUS E.g., NAS RADIUS
| |
| |
Figure 8: Location Server at the Home Network Figure 8: Location Server at the Home Network
The term 'Rule Holder' in Figure 8 denotes the entity that creates The term 'Rule Holder' in Figure 8 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 is 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 [RFC4282] and RFC 4372 [RFC4372] provide Identifier. RFC 4282 [RFC4282] and RFC 4372 [RFC4372] provide
background whether entities in the visited network can obtain the background regarding whether entities in the visited network can
user's NAI in cleartext. obtain the 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
are available. This allows the Location Server in the visited restrictive, are available. This allows the Location Server in the
network to ensure act according to the user's policies. visited network to ensure they act according to the user's policies.
The subsequent figure shows the interacting entities graphically. The subsequent figure shows the interacting entities graphically.
visited network | home network visited network | home network
| |
+----------+ | +----------+ |
|Location | | |Location | |
|Recipient | | |Recipient | |
| | | | | |
+----------+ | +----------+ |
skipping to change at page 55, line 37 skipping to change at page 47, line 37
|Location | | |Location | |
|Generator | |Generator |
+----------+ +----------+
Figure 9: Location Server at the Visited Network Figure 9: 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-Location-Policy-Rules and provide access control using the Extended-Location-Policy-Rules and
to adhere the privacy statements in the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules. to adhere to the privacy statements in the Basic-Location-Policy-
Rules.
A.3. Requirements matching A.3. Requirements Matching
Section 7.1 of [RFC3693] details the requirements of a "Location Section 7.1 of [RFC3693] details the requirements of a "Location
Object". 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 semantics of the
location object is taken from the [RFC3825] and [RFC4776]. It Location Object are taken from [RFC3825] and [RFC4776]. It is
is furthermore possible to convert it to the format used in furthermore possible to convert it to the format used in the
GMLv3 [GMLv3], as used with PIDF-LO [RFC4119]. Geography Markup Language (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
format of the location information. format of the location information.
* Regarding requirement 1.5, location information is only sent * Regarding requirement 1.5, location information is only sent
from the RADIUS client to the RADIUS server. from the RADIUS client to the RADIUS server.
* Regarding requirement 1.6, the Location Object contains both * Regarding requirement 1.6, the Location Object contains both
location information and privacy rules. Location information location information and privacy rules. Location information
is described in Section 4.2, in Section 4.3.1 and in is described in Sections 4.2, 4.3.1, and 4.3.2. The
Section 4.3.2. The corresponding privacy rules are detailed in corresponding privacy rules are detailed in Sections 4.4 and
Section 4.4 and in Section 4.5. 4.5.
* Regarding requirement 1.7, the Location Object is usable in a * Regarding requirement 1.7, the Location Object is usable in a
variety of protocols. The format of the object is reused from variety of protocols. The format of the object is reused from
other documents as detailed in Section 4.2, Section 4.3.1, other documents, as detailed in Sections 4.2, 4.3.1, 4.3.2,
Section 4.3.2 Section 4.4 and in Section 4.5). 4.4, and 4.5.
* Regarding requirement 1.8, the encoding of the Location Object * Regarding requirement 1.8, the encoding of the Location Object
has an emphasis on a lightweight encoding format to be used has an emphasis on a lightweight encoding format to be used
with RADIUS. with RADIUS.
Req. 2. (Location Object fields): Req. 2. (Location Object fields):
* Regarding requirement 2.1, the Target Identifier is carried * Regarding requirement 2.1, the target identifier is carried
within the network access authentication protocol (e.g., within within the network-access authentication protocol (e.g., within
the EAP-Identity Response when EAP is used and/or within the the EAP-Identity Response when EAP is used and/or within the
EAP method itself). As described in Section 7.2 it has a EAP method itself). As described in Section 7.2 of this
number of advantages if this identifier is not carried in document, it has a number of advantages if this identifier is
clear. This is possible with certain EAP methods whereby the not carried in clear. This is possible with certain EAP
identity in the EAP-Identity Response only contains information methods whereby the identity in the EAP-Identity Response only
relevant for routing the response to the user's home network. contains information relevant for routing the response to the
The user identity is protected by the authentication and key user's home network. The user identity is protected by the
exchange protocol. authentication and key exchange protocol.
* Regarding requirement 2.2, the Location Recipient is in the * Regarding requirement 2.2, the Location Recipient is, in the
main scenario the home RADIUS server. For a scenario where the main scenario, the home RADIUS server. For a scenario where
Location Recipient is obtaining Location Information from the the Location Recipient is obtaining location information from
Location Server via HTTP or SIP the respective mechanisms the Location Server via HTTP or SIP, the respective mechanisms
defined in these protocols are used to identify the recipient. defined in these protocols are used to identify the recipient.
The Location Generator cannot, a priori, know the recipients if The Location Generator cannot, a priori, know the recipients if
they are not defined in this protocol. they are not defined in this protocol.
* Regarding requirement 2.3, the credentials of the Location * Regarding requirement 2.3, the credentials of the Location
Recipient are known to the RADIUS entities based on the Recipient are known to the RADIUS entities based on the
security mechanisms defined in the RADIUS protocol itself. security mechanisms defined in the RADIUS protocol itself.
Section 7 describes these security mechanisms offered by the Section 7 of this document describes these security mechanisms
RADIUS protocol. The same is true for requirement 2.4. offered by the RADIUS protocol. The same is true for
requirement 2.4.
* Regarding requirement 2.5, Section 4.2, Section 4.3.1 and * Regarding requirement 2.5, Sections 4.2, 4.3.1, and 4.3.2
Section 4.3.2 describe the content of the location fields. describe the content of the Location fields. Since the
Since the location format itself is not defined in this location format itself is not defined in this document, motion
document motion and direction vectors as listed in requirement and direction vectors as listed in requirement 2.6 are not
2.6 are not defined. defined.
* 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 the 'Sighting Time' and 'Time-to-Live' fields 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 Extended-Location- detailed rule set) is provided with the Extended-Location-
Policy-Rules attribute Section 4.5 . Policy-Rules Attribute in 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):
* Regarding requirement 3.1, this document reuses civic and * Regarding requirement 3.1, this document reuses civic and
geospatial location information as described in Section 4.3.2 geospatial location information as described in Sections 4.3.2
and in Section 4.3.1. and 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 of 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, and LaRes fields
described in [RFC3825]. 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 the
field in [RFC3825]) and via extensions to [RFC3825] and Datum field in [RFC3825]) and via extensions to [RFC3825] and
[RFC4776]. [RFC4776].
Section 7.2 of [RFC3693] details the requirements of a "Using Section 7.2 of [RFC3693] details the requirements of a "using
Protocol". 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 (LO) 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 be 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
using protocol. Section 7 specifies how security mechanisms are using protocol. Section 7 of this document specifies how security
used in RADIUS and how they can be reused to provide security mechanisms are used in RADIUS and how they can be reused to
protection for the Location Object. Additionally, the privacy provide security protection for the Location Object.
considerations (see Section 7.2) are also relevant for this Additionally, the privacy considerations (see Section 7.2) are
requirement. also relevant for this 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 [RFC3693] 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 8 the Req. 7. (LS Rules): With the scenario shown in Figure 8, 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 9 the Rule Maker-defined Privacy the scenario shown in Figure 9, 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 Sections
Section 4.5 and Section 7.2 for more details). 4.4, 4.5, and 7.2 for more details).
Req. 8. (LG Rules): For all usage scenario it is possible to Req. 8. (LG Rules): For all usage scenarios, 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 8 the higher granularity. For the scenario shown in Figure 8, the
visited network is already in possession of the users location visited network is already in possession of the user's 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 that 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-Location-Policy-Rules basic ruleset is provided with the Basic-Location-Policy-Rules
Attribute Section 4.4. A reference to the extended ruleset is Attribute (Section 4.4). A reference to the extended ruleset is
carried in Section 4.5. The format of these rules are described carried in Section 4.5. The format of these rules is described in
in [RFC4745] and [I-D.ietf-geopriv-policy]. [RFC4745] and [GEO-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 in Section 4.4 (and
introduced with PIDF-LO [RFC4119]). as introduced with PIDF-LO [RFC4119]).
Section 7.4 of [RFC3693] details the requirements of a "Location Section 7.4 of [RFC3693] details the requirements of a "Location
Object 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' document on EAP method requirements for wireless LANs [RFC4017]).
[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
Section 7 these requirements are fulfilled with the usage of IPsec Section 7, these requirements are fulfilled with the usage of
if mutual authentication refers to the RADIUS entities (acting as IPsec if mutual authentication refers to the RADIUS entities
various Geopriv entities) which directly communicate with each (acting as various GEOPRIV entities) that directly communicate
other. with each other.
Req. 15. (Minimal Crypto): A minimum of security mechanisms are Req. 15. (Minimal Crypto): A minimum of security mechanisms are
mandated by the usage of RADIUS. Communication security for mandated by the usage of RADIUS. Communication security for
Location Objects between RADIUS infrastructure elements is Location Objects between RADIUS infrastructure elements is
provided by the RADIUS protocol (including IPsec and its dynamic provided by the RADIUS protocol (including IPsec and its dynamic
key management framework) rather than on relying on object key-management framework), rather than relying on object security
security via S/SIME (which is not available with RADIUS). via S/SIME (which is not available with RADIUS).
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Hannes Tschofenig (editor) Hannes Tschofenig (editor)
Nokia Siemens Networks Nokia Siemens Networks
Linnoitustie 6 Linnoitustie 6
Espoo 02600 Espoo 02600
Finland Finland
Phone: +358 (50) 4871445 Phone: +358 (50) 4871445
Email: Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net EMail: Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net
URI: http://www.tschofenig.priv.at URI: http://www.tschofenig.priv.at
Farid Adrangi Farid Adrangi
Intel Corporatation Intel Corporatation
2111 N.E. 25th Avenue 2111 N.E. 25th Avenue
Hillsboro OR Hillsboro OR
USA USA
Email: farid.adrangi@intel.com EMail: farid.adrangi@intel.com
Mark Jones Mark Jones
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: 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 Bernard Aboba
Microsoft Corporation Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052 Redmond, WA 98052
US USA
Email: bernarda@microsoft.com EMail: bernarda@microsoft.com
 End of changes. 279 change blocks. 
725 lines changed or deleted 705 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.35. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/