3 DHC Working Group S. Medvinsky
4 Internet Draft Motorola
5 Document: <draft-smedvinsky-dhc-kerbauth-01.txt>
6 Category: Standards Track P.Lalwaney
7 Expires: January 2001 Nokia
12 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients
17 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
18 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
20 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
21 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
22 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
23 Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of
24 six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other
25 documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet- Drafts
26 as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in
29 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
30 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
32 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
33 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
35 The distribution of this memo is unlimited. It is filed as <draft-
36 smedvinsky-dhc-kerbauth-01.txt>, and expires January 2001. Please
37 send comments to the authors.
43 The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) [1] includes an
44 option that allows authentication of all DHCP messages, as specified
45 in [2]. This document specifies a DHCP authentication mode based on
46 Kerberos V tickets. This provides mutual authentication between a
47 DHCP client and server, as well as authentication of all DHCP
50 This document specifies Kerberos message exchanges between an
51 uninitialized client and the KDC (Key Distribution Center) using an
52 IAKERB proxy [7] so that the Kerberos key management phase is
53 decoupled from, and precedes the address allocation and network
54 configuration phase that uses the DHCP authentication option. In
55 order to make use of the IAKERB proxy, this document specifies a
56 transport mechanism that works with an uninitialized client (i.e. a
58 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients July 2000
61 client without an assigned IP address). In addition, the document
62 specifies the format of the Kerberos authenticator to be used with
63 the DHCP authentication option.
65 2. Conventions used in this document
67 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
68 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in
69 this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119.
77 A DHCP client is an Internet host using DHCP to obtain configuration
78 parameters such as a network address.
82 A DHCP server is an Internet host that returns configuration
83 parameters to DHCP clients.
87 A Kerberos term for a record that helps a client authenticate itself
88 to a server; it contains the client's identity, a session key, a
89 timestamp, and other information, all sealed using the server's
90 secret key. It only serves to authenticate a client when presented
91 along with a fresh Authenticator.
93 o "Key Distribution Center"
95 Key Distribution Center, a network service that supplies tickets and
96 temporary session keys; or an instance of that service or the host
97 on which it runs. The KDC services both initial ticket and Ticket-
98 Granting Ticket (TGT) requests. The initial ticket portion is
99 sometimes referred to as the Authentication Server (or service. The
100 Ticket-Granting Ticket portion is sometimes referred to as the
101 Ticket-Granting Server (or service).
105 A Kerberos administrative domain that represents a group of
106 principals registered at a KDC. A single KDC may be responsible for
107 one or more realms. A fully qualified principal name includes a
108 realm name along with a principal name unique within that realm.
110 3.2 Protocol Overview
114 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -2-
116 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients July 2000
119 DHCP as defined in [1] defines the protocol exchanges for a client
120 to obtain its IP address and network configuration information from
121 a DHCP Server. Kerberos V5 as described in [6] defines the protocol
122 and message exchanges to mutually authenticate two parties. It is
123 our goal to provide authentication support for DHCP using Kerberos.
124 This implies that the Kerberos key management exchange has to take
125 place before a client gets its IP address from the DHCP Server.
126 Kerberos assumes that the client has a network address and can
127 contact the Key Distribution Center to obtain its credentials for
128 authenticated communication with an application server.
130 In this specification we utilize the key exchange using an IAKERB
131 proxy described in [7]. This does not require any changes to either
132 the IAKERB or the Kerberos V5 specification. This document also
133 specifies a particular transport that allows an uninitialized client
134 to contact an IAKERB proxy.
136 The Kerberos ticket returned from the key management exchange
137 discussed in Section 5 of this document is passed to the DHCP Server
138 inside the DHCP authentication option with the new Kerberos
139 authenticator type. This is described in Section 6 of this draft.
144 A prior Internet Draft [3] outlined the use of Kerberos-based
145 authentication for DHCP. The proposal tightly coupled the Kerberos
146 client state machines and the DHCP client state machines. As a
147 result, the Kerberos key management messages were carried in DHCP
148 messages, along with the Kerberos authenticators. In addition, the
149 first DHCP message exchange (request, offer) is not authenticated.
151 We propose a protocol exchange where Kerberos key management is
152 decoupled from and precedes authenticated DHCP exchanges. This
153 implies that the Kerberos ticket returned in the initial key
154 management exchange could be used to authenticate servers assigning
155 addresses by non-DHCP address assignment mechanisms like RSIP [4]
156 and for service specific parameter provisioning mechanisms using SLP
172 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -3-
174 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients July 2000
178 4. System Architecture
183 | | 5.Authenticated DHCP | |
184 | DHCP |<------------------------>| DHCP |
185 | client | | server |
196 ------------------------------>| |
197 Kerberos Key Mgmt | Proxy |
199 1. AS Request / 2.AS Reply -------
200 3. TGS Request / 4.TGS Reply ^
210 Figure 1: System blocks and message interactions between them
213 In this architecture, the DHCP client obtains a Kerberos ticket from
214 the Key Distribution Center (KDC) using standard Kerberos messages,
215 as specified in [6]. The client, however, contacts the KDC via a
216 proxy server, according to the IAKERB mechanism, described in [7].
217 The are several reasons why a client has to go through this proxy in
218 order to contact the KDC:
220 a)The client may not know the host address of the KDC and may be
221 sending its first request message as a broadcast on a local
222 network. The KDC may not be located on the local network, and
223 even if it were - it will be unable to communicate with a client
224 without an IP address. This document describes a specific
225 mechanism that may be used by a client to communicate with the
230 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -4-
232 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients July 2000
235 b)The client may not know its Kerberos realm name. The proxy is
236 able to fill in the missing client realm name in an AS Request
237 message, as specified in IAKERB. Note that in the case that
238 PKINIT pre-authenticator is used [8], the realm name in the AS
239 Request may be the KDC realm name and not the clientÆs realm name.
241 c) The client does not know the realm name of the DHCP server.
243 According to IAKERB, when the client sends a TGS Request with a
244 missing server realm name, the proxy will return to the client an
245 error message containing the missing realm name.
247 Note that in this case the proxy could return the client a wrong
248 realm name and the client could be fooled into obtaining a ticket
249 for the wrong DHCP server (on the same local network). However,
250 the wrong DHCP server must still be a registered principal in a
251 KDC database. In some circumstances this may be an acceptable
252 compromise. Also, see the security considerations section.
254 IAKERB describes the proxy as part of an application server - the
255 DHCP server in this case. However, in this document we are not
256 requiring the proxy to be integrated with the DHCP server. The
257 same IAKERB mechanisms apply in the more general case, where the
258 proxy is an independent application. This proxy, however, MUST be
259 reachable by a client via a local network broadcast.
261 After a client has obtained a Kerberos ticket for the DHCP server,
262 it will use it as part of an authentication option in the DHCP
263 messages. The only extension to the DHCP protocol is the addition
264 of a new authenticator type based on Kerberos tickets.
266 4.1 Cross-Realm Authentication
268 Figure 1 shows a client communicating with a single KDC via a proxy.
269 However, the DHCP clientÆs realm may be different from the DHCP
270 serverÆs realm. In that case, the client may need to first contact
271 the KDC in its local realm to obtain a cross-realm TGT. Then, the
272 client would use the cross-realm TGT to contact the KDC in the DHCP
273 serverÆs realm, as specified in [6].
275 In the following example a client doesnÆt know its realm or the DHCP
276 serverÆs realm, which happens to be different from the clientÆs
277 realm. Here are the steps in obtaining the ticket for the DHCP
278 server (based on [6] and [7]):
280 1) The client sends AS Request with NULL realm to the proxy.
281 2) The proxy fills in the realm and forwards the AS Request to
282 the KDC in the clientÆs realm.
283 3) The KDC issues a TGT and sends back an AS Reply to the
285 4) The proxy forwards AS Reply to the client.
288 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -5-
290 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients July 2000
293 5) The client sends TGS Request for a principal name "dhcpsrvr"
294 with NULL realm to the proxy.
295 6) The proxy returns KRB_AP_ERR_REALM_REQUIRED error with the
296 DHCP serverÆs realm to the client.
297 7) The client sends another TGS Request for a cross-realm TGT
299 8) The proxy forwards the TGS Request to the KDC in the
301 9) The KDC issues a cross-realm TGT and sends back a TGS Reply
303 10) The proxy forwards TGS Reply to the client.
304 11) The client sends a TGS Request to the proxy for a principal
305 "dhcpsrvr" with the realm name filled in, using a cross-realm
307 12) The proxy forwards TGS Request to the KDC in the DHCP
309 13) The KDC issues a ticket for the DHCP server and sends TGS
310 Reply back to the proxy.
311 14) The proxy forwards TGS Reply to the client.
313 In a most general case, the client may need to contact any number of
314 KDCs in different realms before it can get a ticket for the DHCP
315 server. In each case, the client would contact a KDC via the proxy
316 server, as specified in Section 5 of this document.
318 4.2 Public Key Authentication
320 This specification also allows clients to perform public key
321 authentication to the KDC, based on the PKINIT specification [8].
322 In this case, the size of an AS Request and AS Reply messages is
323 likely to exceed the size of typical link MTU's.
325 Here is an example, where PKINIT is used by a DHCP client that is
326 not a registered principal in the KDC principal database:
328 1) The client sends AS Request with a PKINIT Request pre-
329 authenticator to the proxy. This includes the clientÆs
330 signature and X.509 certificate. The KDC realm field is
332 2) The proxy fills in the realm and forwards the AS Request to
333 the KDC in the filled in realm. This is the realm of the
334 DHCP server. Here, the clientÆs realm is the name of a
335 Certification Authority - not the same as the KDC realm.
336 3) The KDC issues a TGT and sends back an AS Reply with a
337 PKINIT Reply pre-authenticator to the proxy.
338 4) The proxy forwards the AS Reply to the client.
339 5) The client sends TGS Request for a principal name "dhcpsrvr"
340 with the realm found in the TGT to the proxy.
341 6) The proxy forwards TGS Request to the KDC in the DHCP
343 7) The KDC issues a ticket for the DHCP server and sends TGS
344 Reply back to the proxy.
346 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -6-
348 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients July 2000
351 8) The proxy forwards TGS Reply to the client.
354 5. Key Management Exchange that Precedes Network Address Allocation
356 An uninitialized host (e.g. on power-on and reset) does not have a
357 network address. It does have a link layer address or hardware
358 address. At this time, the client may not have any information on
359 its realm or the realm of the address allocation server (DHCP
362 In the Kerberos key management exchange, a client gets its ticket
363 granting ticket (TGT) by contacting the Authentication Server in the
364 KDC using the AS_Request / Reply messages (shown as messages 1 and 2
365 in Figure 1). The client then contacts the Ticket Granting Server in
366 the KDC to get the DHCP server ticket (to be used for mutual
367 authentication with the DHCP server) using the TGS_REQ / TGS_REP
368 messages (shown as messages 3 and 4 in the above figure). It is
369 also possible for the client to obtain a DHCP server ticket directly
370 with the AS Request / Reply exchange, without the use of the TGT.
372 In the use of Kerberos for DHCP authentication, the client (a) does
373 not have an IP/network address (b) does not know he KDCÆs IP address
374 (c) the KDC may not be on the local network and (d) the client may
375 not know the DHCP ServerÆs IP address and realm. We therefore
376 require a Kerberos proxy on the local network to accept broadcast
377 Kerberos request messages (AS_REQ and TGS_REQ) from uninitialized
378 clients and relay them to the appropriate KDC.
380 The uninitialized client formulates a broadcast AS_REQ or TGS_REQ as
383 The request payload contains the client hardware address in
384 addresses field with a negative value for the address type. Kerberos
385 v5 [6] allows for the usage of negative address types for "local"
386 use. Note that IAKERB [7] discourages the use of the addresses field
387 as network addresses may not be known or may change in situation
388 where proxies are used. In this draft we incorporate the negative
389 values permitted in the Kerberos transport in the address type field
390 of both the AS_REQ and TGS_REQ messages. The negative value SHOULD
391 be the negative number of the hardware address type "htype" value
392 (from assigned numbers RFC) used in RFC 2131. The address field of
393 the message contains the clients hardware address.
395 The request payload is UDP encapsulated and addressed to port 88 on
396 the server/proxy. The UDP source port is selected by the client. The
397 source and destination network addresses are the all-zeroÆs address
398 and the broadcast address, respectively. For IPv4, the source IP
399 address is set to 0.0.0.0 and the destination IP address is set to
400 255.255.255.255. The data link layer header source address
401 corresponds to the link layer/hardware address of the client. The
404 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -7-
406 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients July 2000
409 destination link layer address is the broadcast address at the link
410 layer (e.g. for Ethernet the address is ffffffff).
412 In the case where AS_REQ message contains a PKINIT pre-authenticator
413 for public key-based client authentication (based on [8]), the
414 message will probably not fit into a single UDP packet given typical
417 It is assumed that the proxy server on a network is configured with
418 a list of KDCÆs, their realms and their IP addresses. The proxy
419 server will act as a client to the KDC and forward standard Kerberos
420 messages to/from the KDC using unicast UDP or TCP transport
421 mechanisms, according to [6].
423 Upon receiving a broadcast request from a client, the proxy MUST
424 record the clientÆs hardware address that appears as the source
425 address on the frame as well as in the addresses field of the
426 request message. Based on the realm of the KDC specified in the
427 request, the proxy determines the KDC to which this message is
428 relayed as a unicast message from the proxy to the KDC. In the case
429 that the client left the KDC realm name as NULL, it is up to the
430 proxy to first determine the correct realm name and fill it in the
431 request (according to [7]).
433 On receiving a request, the KDC formulates a response (AS_REP or
434 TGS_REP). It includes the clientÆs addresses field in the encrypted
435 part of the ticket (according to [6]). This response is unicast to
438 Upon receiving the reply, the proxy MUST first determine the
439 previously saved hardware address of the client. The proxy
440 broadcasts the reply on its local network. This is a network layer
441 broadcast. At the link level, it uses the hardware address obtained
442 from the addresses field of the request.
444 The client on receiving the response (link layer destination address
445 as its hardware address, network layer address is the broadcast
446 address) must verify that the hardware address in the ticket
447 corresponds to its link layer address.
449 Upon receiving a TGS_REP (or an AS_REP with the application server
450 ticket) from the proxy, the client will have enough information to
451 securely communicate with the application server (the DHCP Server in
452 this case), as specified in the following section.
462 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -8-
464 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients July 2000
467 6. Authenticated Message Exchange Between the DHCP Client and the
470 The ticket returned in the TGS response is used by the DHCP client
471 in the construction of the Kerberos authenticator. The Kerberos
472 ticket serves two purposes: to establish a shared session key with
473 the DHCP server, and is also included as part of a Kerberos
474 authenticator in the DHCP request.
476 If the size of the authenticator is greater than 255 bytes, the DHCP
477 authentication option is repeated multiple times. When the values
478 of all the authentication options are concatenated together, they
479 will make up the complete authenticator.
481 Once the session key is established, the Kerberos structure
482 containing the ticket (AP REQ) can be omitted from the authenticator
483 for subsequent messages sent by both the DHCP client and the DHCP
486 The Kerberos authenticator for a DHCP request message is specified
490 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
491 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
492 | Code | Length | Protocol | Algorithm |
493 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
495 + Replay Detection (64 bits) +
497 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
499 + Authentication token (n octets) ... +
501 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
503 The format of this authenticator is in accordance with [2]. The code
504 for the authentication option is TBD, and the length field contains
505 the length of the remainder of the option, starting with the
508 The value of the protocol field for this authenticator MUST be set
511 The algorithm field MUST take one of the following values:
515 Replay protection field is a monotonically increasing counter field.
516 When the Kerberos AP REQ structure is present in the authenticator
517 the counter may be set to any value. The AP REQ contains its own
518 replay protection mechanism in the form of a timestamp.
520 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -9-
522 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients July 2000
526 Once the session key has been established and the AP REQ is not
527 included in the authenticator, this field MUST be monotonically
528 increasing in the messages sent by the client.
530 Kerberos authenticator token consists of type-length-value
534 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
535 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
536 | Type | Reserved | Payload Length |
537 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
539 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
541 The following attributes are included in the Kerberos authenticator
544 Type Attribute Name Value
545 --------------------------------------------------------------------
546 0 Message Integrity Code Depends on the value of the
547 algorithm field. Its length is
548 16 bytes for HMAC-MD5 [9, 10]
549 and 20 bytes for HMAC-SHA-1
550 [11, 10]. The HMAC key must be
551 derived from Kerberos session
552 key found in the Kerberos
553 ticket according to the key
554 derivation rules in [6]:
556 HMAC Key = DK(sess key,
559 Here, DK is defined in [12] and
560 the key usage value for DHCP is
563 The HMAC is calculated over the
564 entire DHCP message. The
565 Message Integrity Code
566 attribute MUST be set to all 0s
567 for the computation of the
568 HMAC. Because a DHCP relay
569 agent may alter the values of
570 the 'giaddr' and 'hops' fields
571 in the DHCP message, the
572 contents of those two fields
573 MUST also be set to zero for
574 the computation of the HMAC.
575 Rules specified in Section 3 of
576 [2] for the exclusion and
578 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -10-
580 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients July 2000
583 processing of the relay agent
584 information are applicable here
587 This field MUST always be
588 present in the Kerberos
591 1 AP_REQ ASN.1 encoding of a Kerberos
592 AP_REQ message, as specified
593 in [6]. This MUST be included
594 by the client when establishing
595 a new session key. In all
596 other cases, this attribute
599 AP_REQ contains the Kerberos ticket for the DHCP server and also
600 contains information needed by the DHCP server to authenticate the
601 client. After verifying the AP_REQ and decrypting the Kerberos
602 ticket, the DHCP server is able to extract a session key which it
603 now shares with the DHCP client.
605 The Kerberos authenticator token contains its own replay protection
606 mechanism inside the AP_REQ structure. The AP_REQ contains a
607 timestamp that must be within an agreed upon time window at the DHCP
608 server. However, this does not require the DHCP clients to maintain
609 an accurate clock between reboots. Kerberos allows clients to
610 synchronize their clock with the KDC with the help of Kerberos
611 KRB_AP_ERR_SKEW error message, as specified in [6].
613 The DHCP server MUST save both the session key and its associated
614 expiration time found in the Kerberos ticket. Up until the
615 expiration time, the server must accept client requests with the
616 Kerberos authenticator that does not include the AP REQ, using the
617 saved session key in calculating HMAC values.
619 The Kerberos authenticator inside all DHCP server responses MUST NOT
620 contain the AP REQ and MUST use the saved Kerberos session key in
621 calculating HMAC values.
623 When the session key expires, it is the client's responsibility to
624 obtain a new ticket from the KDC and to include an AP REQ inside the
625 Kerberos authenticator for the next DHCP request message.
636 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -11-
638 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients July 2000
641 7. Detailed message flows for Kerberos and DHCP message Exchanges
643 The following flow depicts the Kerberos exchange in which a AS REQ
644 message is used to directly request the DHCP Server ticket. There
645 are no changes to transport mechanisms below when the additional
646 phase of using TGS requests/responses with TGTÆs is used.
648 Client IAKERB Proxy KDC
650 KB-client-------- AS_REQ ------>
652 AS REQ Address type = - (htype)
653 AS REQ Address= hw address
655 src UDP port = senders port
656 destination UDP port = 88
659 destination IP = 255.255.255.255
661 src link layer address =
662 clientÆs HW/link address [e.g Ethernet address]
664 destination link layer address =
665 link broadcast address [e.g. ffffffff for Ethernet]
668 --------------------------->
669 (unicast to UDP port 88)
673 <--------------------------
675 Encrypted portion of ticket
676 Includes clients HW address
679 <---------------AS_REP -----------
682 Ticket includes clientÆs hardware address
685 destination UDP port = copied from src port in AS_REQ
687 src IP = ProxyÆs IP address
688 destination IP = 255.255.255.255
690 src link layer address = ProxyÆs HW/link address
691 destination link layer address =
692 ClientÆs link layer address from AS_REQ
695 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -12-
697 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients July 2000
703 The client uses the ticket received from the KDC in the DHCP
704 Authentication option as described in Section 6.
708 DHCP-client DHCP Server
710 ------DHCPDISCOVER ---->
711 (Auth Protocol = 2, includes Kerberos
712 authenticator with AP REQ )
713 -----------------------------------
715 ----------------------------------
716 | Ticket| Client Authent |
717 --------------------------
719 1. Server decrypts ticket
720 (inside AP REQ) with service
722 2. Server decrypts client
723 authenticator (inside AP REQ)
724 and checks content and
725 checksum to validate the
727 3. Recompute HMAC with session
731 <-------DHCPOFFER----------
732 (Auth Protocol = 2, no AP REQ )
736 ---------DHCPREQUEST------->
737 (Auth Protocol = 2, no AP REQ)
740 <--------DHCPACK-------------
741 (Auth Protocol = 2, no AP REQ )
746 8. Security Considerations
748 DHCP clients that do not know the DHCP serverÆs realm name will get
749 it from the proxy, as specified in IAKERB [7]. Since the proxy is
750 not authenticated, a DHCP client can be fooled into obtaining a
751 ticket for the wrong DHCP server in the wrong realm.
753 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -13-
755 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients July 2000
759 This could happen when the client leaves out the server realm name
760 in a TGS Request message to the proxy. It is also possible,
761 however, for a client to directly request a DHCP server ticket with
762 an AS Request message. In those cases, the same situation occurs
763 when the client leaves out the realm name in an AS Request.
765 This wrong DHCP server is still registered as a valid principal in a
766 database of a KDC that can be trusted by the client. In some
767 circumstances a client may assume that a DHCP server that is a
768 Kerberos principal registered with a trusted KDC will not attempt to
769 deliberately misconfigure a client.
771 This specification provides a tradeoff between:
773 1) The DHCP clients knowing DHCP serverÆs realm ahead of time,
774 which provides for full 2-way authentication at the cost of
775 an additional configuration parameter.
776 2) The DHCP clients not requiring any additional configuration
777 information, besides a password or a key (and a public key
778 certificate if PKINIT is used). This is at the cost of not
779 being able to fully authenticate the identity of the DHCP
787 [1]Droms, R., Arbaugh, W., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol",
788 RFC 2131, Bucknell University, March 1997.
790 [2]Droms, R., Arbaugh, W., "Authentication for DHCP Messages",
791 draft-ietf-dhc-authentication-13.txt, June 2000.
793 [3]Hornstein, K., Lemon, T., "DHCP Authentication Via Kerberos V",
794 draft-hornstein-dhc-kerbauth-02.txt, February 2000.
796 [4]Borella, M., Grabelsky, D., Lo, J., Tuniguchi, K., "Realm
797 Specific IP: Protocol Specification ", draft-ietf-nat-rsip-
798 protocol-06.txt, March 2000.
800 [5]Guttman, E., Perkins, C., Veizades, J., Day, M., "Service
801 Location Protocol, Version 2", RFC 2608, June 1999.
803 [6]Neuman, C., Kohl, J., Ts'o, T., "The Kerberos Network
804 Authentication Service (V5)", draft-ietf-cat-kerberos-revisions-
811 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -14-
813 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients July 2000
817 [7]Swift, M., Trostle, J., "Initial Authentication and Pass Through
818 Authentication Using Kerberos V5 and the GSS-API (IAKERB)",
819 draft-ietf-cat-iakerb-03.txt, September 1999.
821 [8]Tung, B., C. Neuman, M. Hur, A. Medvinsky, S. Medvinsky, J. Wray,
822 J. Trostle, "Public Key Cryptography for Initial Authentication
823 in Kerberos", draft-ietf-cat-pk-init-11.txt, March 2000.
825 [9]Rivest, R., "The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm", RFC 1321, April
828 [10]Krawczyk H., M. Bellare and R. Canetti, "HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for
829 Message Authentication," RFC 2104, February 1997.
831 [11]NIST, FIPS PUB 180-1, "Secure Hash Standard", April 1995.
833 [12]Horowitz, M., "Key Derivation for Authentication, Integrity, and
834 Privacy", draft-horowitz-key-derivation-02.txt, August 1998.
836 [13]Bradner, S. "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", RFC
841 10. Author's Addresses
847 Email: smedvinsky@gi.com
851 12278 Scripps Summit Drive
853 Email: poornima.lalwaney@nokia.com
858 This memo is filed as <draft-smedvinsky-dhc-kerbauth-01.txt>, and
859 expires January 1, 2001.
863 12. Intellectual Property Notices
870 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -15-
872 Kerberos V Authentication Mode for Uninitialized Clients March 2000
875 This section contains two notices as required by [13] for
876 standards track documents. Per [13], section 10.4(A):
878 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
879 intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
880 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
881 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
882 might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it
883 has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the
884 IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
885 standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of
886 claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances
887 of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made
888 to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
889 proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification
890 can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.
892 Per [13] section 10.4(D):
894 The IETF has been notified of intellectual property rights
895 claimed in regard to some or all of the specification contained in
896 this document. For more information consult the online list of
899 13. Full Copyright Statement
901 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
903 This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
904 others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
905 or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
906 and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
907 kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph
908 are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
909 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
910 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
911 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
912 developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
913 copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
914 followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
915 English. The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and
916 will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or
917 assigns. This document and the information contained herein is
918 provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE
919 INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR
920 IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
921 THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
922 WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
928 S. Medvinsky, P. Lalwaney -16-