3 Transport Layer Security Working Group J.Banes
5 Document: draft-ietf-tls-emailaddr-00.txt Microsoft
6 Expires: March 2004 September 2003
9 Update to Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extensions
14 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
15 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026 [i].
17 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
18 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
19 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
20 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
22 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
23 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
24 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
25 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
29 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
34 This document is an update to the Transport Layer Security (TLS)
35 Extensions. This update provides an additional choice in the
36 ServerName type of the Server_Name extension. The Server Name
37 extension allows the client to specify the name of the server to
38 which it is attempting to connect. The new choice specified in this
39 document allows the client to specify an email name as the server
43 Conventions used in this document
45 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
46 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
47 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119
54 Crall Expires û March 2004 [Page 1]
55 \f draft-ietf-tls-emailaddr-00.txt September 2003
58 1. Introduction...................................................1
59 2. EmailAddr ServerName Indication................................1
60 3. Error Alerts...................................................1
61 4. Security Considerations........................................1
62 5. Acknowledgments................................................1
63 6. AuthorsÆ Addresses.............................................1
64 7. Normative References...........................................1
69 RFC 3546 [TLSEXT]provides a set of extensions to the Transport Layer
70 Security (TLS) protocol. One of these extensions is the Server Name
71 extension. The Server Name extension provides a mechanism for the
72 client to specify the name of the server to which it is connecting.
73 This extension is provided as part of the client hello message. RFC
74 3546 defines one Server Name type, ôhostnameö. This draft adds a
75 second Server Name type, ôemailaddrö.
79 2. EmailAddr ServerName Indication
81 RFC 3546 defines a Server Name Indication as a mechanism for a client
82 to tell a server the name of the server that it is contacting. The
83 Server Name Indication information is helpful when a single server
84 may be acting as multiple virtual servers.
86 RFC 3546 defines the structure shown below which is part of the
87 extended client hello message.
92 case host_name: HostName;
100 opaque HostName<1..2^16-1>;
103 ServerName server_name_list<1..2^16-1>
109 Crall Expires û March 2004 [Page 2]
110 \f draft-ietf-tls-emailaddr-00.txt September 2003
113 This draft proposes a new NameType be added, ôemail_addrö. As with
114 host_name, email_addr is used to identify the appropriate virtual
115 server and therefore help the server select the appropriate
116 certificate to return to the client. Therefore, the new structure
117 looks like the following:
123 case host_name: HostName;
124 case email_name: EmailName;
129 host_name(0), email_name(1),(255)
132 opaque HostName<1..2^16-1>;
134 opaque EmailName<1..2^16-1>;
137 ServerName server_name_list<1..2^16-1>
141 The syntax of EmailName MUST conform to email addresses as defined in
145 The new alert, ôunrecognized_nameö defined in RFC 3546 should be
146 returned by the server when the server name is unrecognized, whether
147 the name is a HostName or an EmailName. As stated in RFC 3546, this
150 4. Security Considerations
152 The security considerations for the new EmailName are similar to
153 those of the HostName in RFC 3546.
155 The server receiving an extended client hello message with an
156 EmailName MUST ensure the name does not cause a buffer overflow
159 The EmailName supports internationalized hostnames. However, this
160 specification does not deal with security issues of internationalized
164 Crall Expires û March 2004 [Page 3]
165 \f draft-ietf-tls-emailaddr-00.txt September 2003
172 The authors wish to thank the authors of RFC 3546 for their help.
175 6. AuthorsÆ Addresses
179 Email: jbanes@microsoft.com
183 Email: ccrall@microsoft.com
186 7. Normative References
189 [KEYWORDS] Bradner, S., ôKey words for use in RFCs to Indicate
190 Requirement Levelsö, BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997
192 [RFC822] Crocker, D., ôStandard for the Format of ARPA Internet Text
193 Messagesö, RFC 822, August 1982
195 [TLSEXT] Blake-Wilson, S., Nystrom, M., Hopwwod, D., Mikkelsen, J.
196 and Wright, T., ôTransport Layer Security (TLS) Extensionsö, RFC
219 Crall Expires û March 2004 [Page 4]