draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-domain-based-names-04.txt   draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-domain-based-names-05.txt 
NETWORK WORKING GROUP N. Williams NETWORK WORKING GROUP N. Williams
Internet-Draft Sun Internet-Draft Sun
Expires: May 22, 2008 November 19, 2007 Expires: June 23, 2008 A. Melnikov
Isode Ltd.
December 21, 2007
GSS-API Internationalization and Domain-Based Service Names and Name GSS-API Internationalization and Domain-Based Service Names and Name
Type Type
draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-domain-based-names-04.txt draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-domain-based-names-05.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
skipping to change at page 1, line 34 skipping to change at page 1, line 36
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 22, 2008. This Internet-Draft will expire on June 23, 2008.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
Abstract Abstract
This document describes domainname-based service principal names and This document describes domainname-based service principal names and
the corresponding name type for the Generic Security Service the corresponding name type for the Generic Security Service
Application Programming Interface (GSS-API). Internationalization of Application Programming Interface (GSS-API). Internationalization of
skipping to change at page 2, line 25 skipping to change at page 2, line 25
to provide a measure of protection to applications that utilize to provide a measure of protection to applications that utilize
insecure service discovery protocols. This is achieved by providing insecure service discovery protocols. This is achieved by providing
a way to name clustered services after the "domain" which they a way to name clustered services after the "domain" which they
service, thereby allowing their clients to authorize the service's service, thereby allowing their clients to authorize the service's
servers based on authentication of their service names. servers based on authentication of their service names.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Name Type OID and Symbolic Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Name Type OID and Symbolic Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Query and Display Syntaxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Query and Display Syntaxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. Examples of domain-based names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.1. Examples of domain-based names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Internationalization (I18N) considerations . . . . . . . . . 7 5. Internationalization (I18N) considerations . . . . . . . . . 7
5.1. Importing internationalized names . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1. Importing internationalized names . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.2. Displaying internationalized names . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.2. Displaying internationalized names . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Application protocol examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6. Application protocol examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.1. NFSv4 domain-wide namespace root server discovery . . . . . 8 6.1. NFSv4 domain-wide namespace root server discovery . . . . . 8
6.2. LDAP server discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6.2. LDAP server discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . 13 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . 13
1. Conventions used in this document 1. Conventions used in this document
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].
2. Introduction 2. Introduction
skipping to change at page 5, line 5 skipping to change at page 5, line 5
names, though domain-based names could be used in non-DNS names, though domain-based names could be used in non-DNS
environments. Because of the use of DNS names we must also provide environments. Because of the use of DNS names we must also provide
for internationalization of the GSS-API. for internationalization of the GSS-API.
Note that domain-based naming isn't new. According to a report to Note that domain-based naming isn't new. According to a report to
the KITTEN WG mailing list there exists at least one implementation the KITTEN WG mailing list there exists at least one implementation
of LDAP which uses domain-based service naming, and the DIGEST-MD5 of LDAP which uses domain-based service naming, and the DIGEST-MD5
HTTP/SASL mechanism [RFC2831] describes a similar notion (see section HTTP/SASL mechanism [RFC2831] describes a similar notion (see section
2.1.2, description of the "serv-name" field of the digest-response). 2.1.2, description of the "serv-name" field of the digest-response).
3. Name Type OID and Symbolic Name 3. IANA Considerations
The new name type has an OID of 3.1. Name Type OID and Symbolic Name
[NOTE: OID assignment to be made with IANA.] IANA is requested to assign a new OID for the new GSS-API name type
defined in this document. This OID should have the following prefix:
{iso(1) org(3) dod(6) internet(1) security(5) nametypes(6) gss- {iso(1) org(3) dod(6) internet(1) security(5) nametypes(6) gss-
domain-based(5)} domain-based(5)}
The recommended symbolic name for this GSS-API name type is The recommended symbolic name for this GSS-API name type is
"GSS_C_NT_DOMAINBASED_SERVICE". "GSS_C_NT_DOMAINBASED_SERVICE".
4. Query and Display Syntaxes 4. Query and Display Syntaxes
There is a single name syntax for domain-based names. There is a single name syntax for domain-based names. It is
expressed using the ABNF [RFC4234].
The syntax is: The syntax is:
domain-based-name := domain-based-name =
<service> '@' <domain> '@' <hostname> service "@" domain "@" hostname
Note that for Internet domain names the trailing '.' MUST NOT be hostname =
included in the hostname part of the display form GSS-API domain-
based MNs; hostnames MUST NOT contain '@'. domain
domain
sub-domain 1*("." sub-domain)
sub-domain
Let-dig [Ldh-str]
Let-dig
ALPHA / DIGIT
Ldh-str
*( ALPHA / DIGIT / "-" ) Let-dig
Where <service> is defined in Section 4.1 of [RFC2743]. Other rules
not defined above are defined in Appendix B.1 of [RFC4234].
4.1. Examples of domain-based names 4.1. Examples of domain-based names
These examples are not normative: These examples are not normative:
o ldap@example.tld@ds1.example.tld o ldap@somecompany.example@ds1.somecompany.example
o nfs@example.tld@nfsroot1.example.tld o nfs@somecompany.example@nfsroot1.somecompany.example
The .example top-level domain is used here in accordance with
[RFC2606].
5. Internationalization (I18N) considerations 5. Internationalization (I18N) considerations
We introduce new versions of GSS_Import_name() and GSS_Display_name() We introduce new versions of GSS_Import_name() and GSS_Display_name()
to better support Unicode. Additionally we provide for the use of to better support Unicode. Additionally we provide for the use of
ACE-encoded DNS in the non-internationalized interfaces [RFC3490]. ACE-encoded DNS in the non-internationalized interfaces [RFC3490].
5.1. Importing internationalized names 5.1. Importing internationalized names
When the input_name_type parameter is the When the input_name_type parameter is the
skipping to change at page 8, line 47 skipping to change at page 8, line 47
existing clients may use host-based naming to authenticate servers existing clients may use host-based naming to authenticate servers
discovered through SRV RR lookups. Changing such clients to use discovered through SRV RR lookups. Changing such clients to use
domain-based naming when domain-based acceptor credentials have not domain-based naming when domain-based acceptor credentials have not
been deployed to LDAP servers, or when LDAP servers have not been been deployed to LDAP servers, or when LDAP servers have not been
modified to allow use of domain-based naming, would break modified to allow use of domain-based naming, would break
interoperability. That is, there is a legacy server interoperability interoperability. That is, there is a legacy server interoperability
issue here. Therefore LDAP clients may require additional issue here. Therefore LDAP clients may require additional
configuration at deployment time to enable (or disable) use of configuration at deployment time to enable (or disable) use of
domain-based naming. domain-based naming.
Note: whether SASL [RFC4422] or its GSS-API bridges Note: whether SASL [RFC4422] or its GSS-API bridges [RFC4752]
[I-D.ietf-sasl-gssapi] [I-D.josefsson-sasl-gs2] require updates in [I-D.josefsson-sasl-gs2] require updates in order allow use of
order allow use of domain-based names is not relevant to the theory domain-based names is not relevant to the theory of how domain-based
of how domain-based naming would protect LDAP clients' server naming would protect LDAP clients' server discovery.
discovery.
7. Security Considerations 7. Security Considerations
Use of GSS-API domain-based names may not be negotiable by some GSS- Use of GSS-API domain-based names may not be negotiable by some GSS-
API mechanisms, and some acceptors may not support GSS-API domain- API mechanisms, and some acceptors may not support GSS-API domain-
based names. In such cases initiators are left to fallback on the based names. In such cases initiators are left to fallback on the
use of hostbased names, in which case the initiators MUST also verify use of hostbased names, in which case the initiators MUST also verify
that the acceptor's hostbased name is authorized to provide the given that the acceptor's hostbased name is authorized to provide the given
service for the domain that the initiator had wanted. service for the domain that the initiator had wanted.
skipping to change at page 10, line 29 skipping to change at page 10, line 29
specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782, specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782,
February 2000. February 2000.
[RFC2831] Leach, P. and C. Newman, "Using Digest Authentication as a [RFC2831] Leach, P. and C. Newman, "Using Digest Authentication as a
SASL Mechanism", RFC 2831, May 2000. SASL Mechanism", RFC 2831, May 2000.
[RFC3490] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello, [RFC3490] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello,
"Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)", "Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)",
RFC 3490, March 2003. RFC 3490, March 2003.
[RFC4033] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. [RFC4234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements", Specifications: ABNF", RFC 4234, October 2005.
RFC 4033, March 2005.
8.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-sasl-gssapi]
Melnikov, A., "The Kerberos V5 ("GSSAPI") SASL mechanism",
draft-ietf-sasl-gssapi-08 (work in progress),
September 2006.
[I-D.josefsson-sasl-gs2] [I-D.josefsson-sasl-gs2]
Josefsson, S., "Using GSS-API Mechanisms in SASL: The GS2 Josefsson, S., "Using GSS-API Mechanisms in SASL: The GS2
Mechanism Family", draft-josefsson-sasl-gs2-00 (work in Mechanism Family", draft-josefsson-sasl-gs2-00 (work in
progress), November 2005. progress), November 2005.
[RFC2203] Eisler, M., Chiu, A., and L. Ling, "RPCSEC_GSS Protocol [RFC2203] Eisler, M., Chiu, A., and L. Ling, "RPCSEC_GSS Protocol
Specification", RFC 2203, September 1997. Specification", RFC 2203, September 1997.
[RFC2606] Eastlake, D. and A. Panitz, "Reserved Top Level DNS
Names", BCP 32, RFC 2606, June 1999.
[RFC3530] Shepler, S., Callaghan, B., Robinson, D., Thurlow, R., [RFC3530] Shepler, S., Callaghan, B., Robinson, D., Thurlow, R.,
Beame, C., Eisler, M., and D. Noveck, "Network File System Beame, C., Eisler, M., and D. Noveck, "Network File System
(NFS) version 4 Protocol", RFC 3530, April 2003. (NFS) version 4 Protocol", RFC 3530, April 2003.
[RFC4033] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements",
RFC 4033, March 2005.
[RFC4422] Melnikov, A. and K. Zeilenga, "Simple Authentication and [RFC4422] Melnikov, A. and K. Zeilenga, "Simple Authentication and
Security Layer (SASL)", RFC 4422, June 2006. Security Layer (SASL)", RFC 4422, June 2006.
Author's Address [RFC4752] Melnikov, A., "The Kerberos V5 ("GSSAPI") Simple
Authentication and Security Layer (SASL) Mechanism",
RFC 4752, November 2006.
Authors' Addresses
Nicolas Williams Nicolas Williams
Sun Microsystems Sun Microsystems
5300 Riata Trace Ct 5300 Riata Trace Ct
Austin, TX 78727 Austin, TX 78727
US US
Email: Nicolas.Williams@sun.com Email: Nicolas.Williams@sun.com
Alexey Melnikov
Isode Ltd.
5 Castle Business Village,
36 Station Road
Hampton, Middlesex TW12 2BX
United Kingdom
Email: Alexey.Melnikov@isode.com
Full Copyright Statement Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights. retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
 End of changes. 21 change blocks. 
30 lines changed or deleted 70 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.34. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/