<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd">
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocompact="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="3"?>
<?rfc tocindent="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc comments="yes"?>
<?rfc inline="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<rfc category="exp" docName="draft-ietf-lisp-sec-11" ipr="trust200902">
  <front>
    <title abbrev="LISP-SEC">LISP-Security (LISP-SEC)</title>

    <author fullname="Fabio Maino" initials="F.M" surname="Maino">
      <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>170 Tasman Drive</street>

          <city>San Jose</city>

          <code>95134</code>

          <region>California</region>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <email>fmaino@cisco.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Vina Ermagan" initials="V.E" surname="Ermagan">
      <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>170 Tasman Drive</street>

          <city>San Jose</city>

          <code>95134</code>

          <region>California</region>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <email>vermagan@cisco.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Albert Cabellos" initials="A.C" surname="Cabellos">
      <organization>Technical University of Catalonia</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>c/ Jordi Girona s/n</street>

          <city>Barcelona</city>

          <code>08034</code>

          <region></region>

          <country>Spain</country>
        </postal>

        <email>acabello@ac.upc.edu</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Damien Saucez" initials="D.S" surname="Saucez">
      <organization>INRIA</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>2004 route des Lucioles - BP 93</street>

          <city>Sophia Antipolis</city>

          <code></code>

          <region></region>

          <country>France</country>
        </postal>

        <email>damien.saucez@inria.fr</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <date day="3" month="October" year="2016" />

    <area>Internet</area>

    <workgroup>Network Working Group</workgroup>

    <keyword>LISP; deployment</keyword>

    <abstract>
      <t>This memo specifies LISP-SEC, a set of security mechanisms that
      provides origin authentication, integrity and anti-replay protection to
      LISP's EID-to-RLOC mapping data conveyed via mapping lookup process.
      LISP-SEC also enables verification of authorization on EID-prefix claims
      in Map-Reply messages.</t>
    </abstract>

    <note title="Requirements Language">
      <t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
      "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
      document are to be interpreted as described in <xref
      target="RFC2119"></xref>.</t>
    </note>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <section anchor="intro" title="Introduction">
      <t>The Locator/ID Separation Protocol <xref target="RFC6830"></xref>
      defines a set of functions for routers to exchange information used to
      map from non-routable Endpoint Identifiers (EIDs) to routable Routing
      Locators (RLOCs). If these EID-to-RLOC mappings, carried through
      Map-Reply messages, are transmitted without integrity protection, an
      adversary can manipulate them and hijack the communication, impersonate
      the requested EID, or mount Denial of Service or Distributed Denial of
      Service attacks. Also, if the Map-Reply message is transported
      unauthenticated, an adversarial LISP entity can overclaim an EID-prefix
      and maliciously redirect traffic directed to a large number of hosts. A
      detailed description of "overclaiming" attack is provided in <xref
      target="RFC7835"></xref>.</t>

      <t>This memo specifies LISP-SEC, a set of security mechanisms that
      provides origin authentication, integrity and anti-replay protection to
      LISP's EID-to-RLOC mapping data conveyed via mapping lookup process.
      LISP-SEC also enables verification of authorization on EID-prefix claims
      in Map-Reply messages, ensuring that the sender of a Map-Reply that
      provides the location for a given EID-prefix is entitled to do so
      according to the EID prefix registered in the associated Map-Server.
      Map-Register security, including the right for a LISP entity to register
      an EID-prefix or to claim presence at an RLOC, is out of the scope of
      LISP-SEC. Additional security considerations are described in Section
      6.</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="terms" title="Definition of Terms">
      <t><list style="empty">
          <t>One-Time Key (OTK): An ephemeral randomly generated key that must
          be used for a single Map-Request/Map-Reply exchange.</t>

          <t><list style="empty">
              <t>ITR-OTK: The One-Time Key generated at the ITR.</t>

              <t>MS-OTK: The One-Time Key generated at the Map-Server.</t>
            </list>Encapsulated Control Message (ECM): A LISP control message
          that is prepended with an additional LISP header. ECM is used by
          ITRs to send LISP control messages to a Map-Resolver, by
          Map-Resolvers to forward LISP control messages to a Map-Server, and
          by Map-Resolvers to forward LISP control messages to an ETR.</t>

          <t>Authentication Data (AD): Metadata that is included either in a
          LISP ECM header or in a Map-Reply message to support
          confidentiality, integrity protection, and verification of
          EID-prefix authorization.</t>

          <t><list style="empty">
              <t>OTK-AD: The portion of ECM Authentication Data that contains
              a One-Time Key.</t>

              <t>EID-AD: The portion of ECM and Map-Reply Authentication Data
              used for verification of EID-prefix authorization.</t>

              <t>PKT-AD: The portion of Map-Reply Authentication Data used to
              protect the integrity of the Map-Reply message.</t>
            </list></t>
        </list>For definitions of other terms, notably Map-Request, Map-Reply,
      Ingress Tunnel Router (ITR), Egress Tunnel Router (ETR), Map-Server
      (MS), and Map-Resolver (MR) please consult the LISP specification <xref
      target="RFC6830"></xref>.</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="threat-model" title="LISP-SEC Threat Model">
      <t>LISP-SEC addresses the control plane threats, described in <xref
      target="RFC7835"></xref>, that target EID-to-RLOC mappings, including
      manipulations of Map-Request and Map-Reply messages, and malicious ETR
      EID prefix overclaiming. LISP-SEC makes two main assumptions: (1) the
      LISP mapping system is expected to deliver a Map-Request message to
      their intended destination ETR as identified by the EID, and (2) no
      man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack can be mounted within the LISP Mapping
      System. Furthermore, while LISP-SEC enables detection of EID prefix
      overclaiming attacks, it assumes that Map-Servers can verify the EID
      prefix authorization at time of registration.</t>

      <t>According to the threat model described in <xref
      target="RFC7835"></xref> LISP-SEC assumes that any kind of attack,
      including MITM attacks, can be mounted in the access network, outside of
      the boundaries of the LISP mapping system. An on-path attacker, outside
      of the LISP mapping system can, for example, hijack Map-Request and
      Map-Reply messages, spoofing the identity of a LISP node. Another
      example of on-path attack, called overclaiming attack, can be mounted by
      a malicious Egress Tunnel Router (ETR), by overclaiming the EID-prefixes
      for which it is authoritative. In this way the ETR can maliciously
      redirect traffic directed to a large number of hosts.</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="operations" title="Protocol Operations">
      <t>The goal of the security mechanisms defined in <xref
      target="RFC6830"></xref> is to prevent unauthorized insertion of mapping
      data by providing origin authentication and integrity protection for the
      Map-Registration, and by using the nonce to detect unsolicited Map-Reply
      sent by off-path attackers.</t>

      <t>LISP-SEC builds on top of the security mechanisms defined in <xref
      target="RFC6830"></xref> to address the threats described in <xref
      target="threat-model"></xref> by leveraging the trust relationships
      existing among the LISP entities participating to the exchange of the
      Map-Request/Map-Reply messages. Those trust relationships are used to
      securely distribute a One-Time Key (OTK) that provides origin
      authentication, integrity and anti-replay protection to mapping data
      conveyed via the mapping lookup process, and that effectively prevent
      overclaiming attacks. The processing of security parameters during the
      Map-Request/Map-Reply exchange is as follows:</t>

      <t><list style="symbols">
          <t>The ITR-OTK is generated and stored at the ITR, and securely
          transported to the Map-Server.</t>

          <t>The Map-Server uses the ITR-OTK to compute an HMAC that protects
          the integrity of the mapping data known to the Map-Server to prevent
          overclaiming attacks. The Map-Server also derives a new OTK, the
          MS-OTK, that is passed to the ETR, by applying a Key Derivation
          Function (KDF) to the ITR-OTK.</t>

          <t>The ETR uses the MS-OTK to compute an HMAC that protects the
          integrity of the Map-Reply sent to the ITR.</t>

          <t>Finally, the ITR uses the stored ITR-OTK to verify the integrity
          of the mapping data provided by both the Map-Server and the ETR, and
          to verify that no overclaiming attacks were mounted along the path
          between the Map-Server and the ITR.</t>
        </list></t>

      <t><xref target="encap"></xref> provides the detailed description of the
      LISP-SEC control messages and their processing, while the rest of this
      section describes the flow of protocol operations at each entity
      involved in the Map-Request/Map-Reply exchange:</t>

      <t><list style="symbols">
          <t>The ITR, upon needing to transmit a Map-Request message,
          generates and stores an OTK (ITR-OTK). This ITR-OTK is included into
          the Encapsulated Control Message (ECM) that contains the Map-Request
          sent to the Map-Resolver. To provide confidentiality to the ITR-OTK
          over the path between the ITR and its Map-Resolver, the ITR-OTK
          SHOULD be encrypted using a preconfigured key shared between the ITR
          and the Map-Resolver, similar to the key shared between the ETR and
          the Map-Server in order to secure ETR registration <xref
          target="RFC6833"></xref>.</t>

          <t>The Map-Resolver decapsulates the ECM message, decrypts the
          ITR-OTK, if needed, and forwards through the Mapping System the
          received Map-Request and the ITR-OTK, as part of a new ECM message.
          As described in <xref target="map-resolver"></xref>, the LISP
          Mapping System delivers the ECM to the appropriate Map-Server, as
          identified by the EID destination address of the Map-Request.</t>

          <t>The Map-Server is configured with the location mappings and
          policy information for the ETR responsible for the EID destination
          address. Using this preconfigured information, the Map-Server, after
          the decapsulation of the ECM message, finds the longest match
          EID-prefix that covers the requested EID in the received
          Map-Request. The Map-Server adds this EID-prefix, together with an
          HMAC computed using the ITR-OTK, to a new Encapsulated Control
          Message that contains the received Map-Request.</t>

          <t>The Map-Server derives a new OTK, the MS-OTK, by applying a Key
          Derivation Function (KDF) to the ITR-OTK. This MS-OTK is included in
          the Encapsulated Control Message that the Map-Server uses to forward
          the Map-Request to the ETR. To provide MS-OTK confidentiality over
          the path between the Map-Server and the ETR, the MS-OTK should be
          encrypted using the key shared between the ETR and the Map-Server in
          order to secure ETR registration <xref target="RFC6833"></xref>.</t>

          <t>If the Map-Server is acting in proxy mode, as specified in <xref
          target="RFC6830"></xref>, the ETR is not involved in the generation
          of the Map-Reply. In this case the Map-Server generates the
          Map-Reply on behalf of the ETR as described below.</t>

          <t>The ETR, upon receiving the ECM encapsulated Map-Request from the
          Map-Server, decrypts the MS-OTK, if needed, and originates a
          standard Map-Reply that contains the EID-to-RLOC mapping information
          as specified in <xref target="RFC6830"></xref>.</t>

          <t>The ETR computes an HMAC over this standard Map-Reply, keyed with
          MS-OTK to protect the integrity of the whole Map-Reply. The ETR also
          copies the EID-prefix authorization data that the Map-Server
          included in the ECM encapsulated Map-Request into the Map-Reply
          message. The ETR then sends this complete Map-Reply message to the
          requesting ITR.</t>

          <t>The ITR, upon receiving the Map-Reply, uses the locally stored
          ITR-OTK to verify the integrity of the EID-prefix authorization data
          included in the Map-Reply by the Map-Server. The ITR computes the
          MS-OTK by applying the same KDF used by the Map-Server, and verifies
          the integrity of the Map-Reply. If the integrity checks fail, the
          Map-Reply MUST be discarded. Also, if the EID-prefixes claimed by
          the ETR in the Map-Reply are not equal or more specific than the
          EID-prefix authorization data inserted by the Map-Server, the ITR
          MUST discard the Map-Reply.</t>
        </list></t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="encap" title="LISP-SEC Control Messages Details">
      <t>LISP-SEC metadata associated with a Map-Request is transported within
      the Encapsulated Control Message that contains the Map-Request.</t>

      <t>LISP-SEC metadata associated with the Map-Reply is transported within
      the Map-Reply itself.</t>

      <section title="Encapsulated Control Message LISP-SEC Extensions">
        <t>LISP-SEC uses the ECM (Encapsulated Control Message) defined in
        <xref target="RFC6830"></xref> with Type set to 8, and S bit set to 1
        to indicate that the LISP header includes Authentication Data (AD).
        The format of the LISP-SEC ECM Authentication Data is defined in the
        following figure. OTK-AD stands for One-Time Key Authentication Data
        and EID-AD stands for EID Authentication Data.</t>

        <figure align="center" title="LISP-SEC ECM Authentication Data">
          <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[
 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 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|     AD Type   |V|  Reserved   |        Requested HMAC ID      |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+\
|              OTK Length       |       OTK Encryption ID       | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
|                       One-Time-Key Preamble ...               | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ OTK-AD
|                   ... One-Time-Key Preamble                   | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
~                      One-Time Key (128 bits)                  ~/
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ <---+
|           EID-AD Length       |           KDF ID              |     | 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+     |
| Record Count  |    Reserved   |         EID HMAC ID           |     EID-AD
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+\    |
|   Reserved    | EID mask-len  |           EID-AFI             | |   |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Rec |
~                          EID-prefix ...                       ~ |   |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+/    |
~                            EID HMAC                           ~     |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ <---+          ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t><list style="empty">
            <t>AD Type: 1 (LISP-SEC Authentication Data)</t>

            <t>V: Key Version bit. This bit is toggled when the sender
            switches to a new OTK wrapping key</t>

            <t>Reserved: Set to 0 on transmission and ignored on receipt.</t>

            <t>Requested HMAC ID: The HMAC algorithm requested by the ITR. See
            <xref target="itr"></xref> for details.</t>

            <t>OTK Length: The length (in bytes) of the OTK Authentication
            Data (OTK-AD), that contains the OTK Preamble and the OTK.</t>

            <t>OTK Encryption ID: The identifier of the key wrapping algorithm
            used to encrypt the One-Time-Key. When a 128-bit OTK is sent
            unencrypted by the Map-Resolver, the OTK Encryption ID is set to
            NULL_KEY_WRAP_128. See <xref target="encryption"></xref> for more
            details.</t>

            <t>One-Time-Key Preamble: set to 0 if the OTK is not encrypted.
            When the OTK is encrypted, this field may carry additional
            metadata resulting from the key wrapping operation. When a 128-bit
            OTK is sent unencrypted by Map-Resolver, the OTK Preamble is set
            to 0x0000000000000000 (64 bits). See <xref
            target="encryption"></xref> for details.</t>

            <t>One-Time-Key: the OTK encrypted (or not) as specified by OTK
            Encryption ID. See <xref target="encryption"></xref> for
            details.</t>

            <t>EID-AD Length: length (in bytes) of the EID Authentication Data
            (EID-AD). The ITR MUST set EID-AD Length to 4 bytes, as it only
            fills the KDF ID field, and all the remaining fields part of the
            EID-AD are not present. An EID-AD MAY contain multiple
            EID-records. Each EID-record is 4-byte long plus the length of the
            AFI-encoded EID-prefix.</t>

            <t>KDF ID: Identifier of the Key Derivation Function used to
            derive the MS-OTK. The ITR SHOULD use this field to indicate the
            recommended KDF algorithm, according to local policy. The
            Map-Server can overwrite the KDF ID if it does not support the KDF
            ID recommended by the ITR. See Section 5.4 for more details.</t>

            <t>Record Count: The number of records in this Map-Request
            message. A record is comprised of the portion of the packet that
            is labeled 'Rec' above and occurs the number of times equal to
            Record Count.</t>

            <t>Reserved: Set to 0 on transmission and ignored on receipt.</t>

            <t>EID HMAC ID: Identifier of the HMAC algorithm used to protect
            the integrity of the EID-AD. This field is filled by Map-Server
            that computed the EID-prefix HMAC. See Section 5.4 for more
            details.</t>

            <t>EID mask-len: Mask length for EID-prefix.</t>

            <t>EID-AFI: Address family of EID-prefix according to <xref
            target="RFC5226"></xref></t>

            <t>EID-prefix: The Map-Server uses this field to specify the
            EID-prefix that the destination ETR is authoritative for, and is
            the longest match for the requested EID.</t>

            <t>EID HMAC: HMAC of the EID-AD computed and inserted by
            Map-Server. Before computing the HMAC operation the EID HMAC field
            MUST be set to 0. The HMAC covers the entire EID-AD.</t>
          </list></t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="map-reply" title="Map-Reply LISP-SEC Extensions">
        <t>LISP-SEC uses the Map-Reply defined in <xref
        target="RFC6830"></xref>, with Type set to 2, and S bit set to 1 to
        indicate that the Map-Reply message includes Authentication Data (AD).
        The format of the LISP-SEC Map-Reply Authentication Data is defined in
        the following figure. PKT-AD is the Packet Authentication Data that
        covers the Map-Reply payload.</t>

        <figure align="center" title="LISP-SEC Map-Reply Authentication Data">
          <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[ 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 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|    AD Type    |                 Reserved                      |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ <---+
|           EID-AD Length       |           KDF ID              |     | 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+     |
| Record Count  |    Reserved   |         EID HMAC ID           |     EID-AD
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+\    |
|   Reserved    | EID mask-len  |           EID-AFI             | |   |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Rec |
~                          EID-prefix ...                       ~ |   |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+/    |
~                            EID HMAC                           ~     |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ <---+
|         PKT-AD Length         |         PKT HMAC ID           |\  
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
~                            PKT HMAC                           ~ PKT-AD
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+/        ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t><list style="empty">
            <t>AD Type: 1 (LISP-SEC Authentication Data)</t>

            <t>EID-AD Length: length (in bytes) of the EID-AD. An EID-AD MAY
            contain multiple EID-records. Each EID-record is 4-byte long plus
            the length of the AFI-encoded EID-prefix.</t>

            <t>KDF ID: Identifier of the Key Derivation Function used to
            derive MS-OTK. See <xref target="map-server"></xref> for more
            details.</t>

            <t>Record Count: The number of records in this Map-Reply message.
            A record is comprised of the portion of the packet that is labeled
            'Rec' above and occurs the number of times equal to Record
            Count.</t>

            <t>Reserved: Set to 0 on transmission and ignored on receipt.</t>

            <t>EID HMAC ID: Identifier of the HMAC algorithm used to protect
            the integrity of the EID-AD. See <xref target="map-server"></xref>
            for more details.</t>

            <t>EID mask-len: Mask length for EID-prefix.</t>

            <t>EID-AFI: Address family of EID-prefix according to <xref
            target="RFC5226"></xref>.</t>

            <t>EID-prefix: This field contains an EID-prefix that the
            destination ETR is authoritative for, and is the longest match for
            the requested EID.</t>

            <t>EID HMAC: HMAC of the EID-AD, as computed by the Map-Server.
            Before computing the HMAC operation the EID HMAC field MUST be set
            to 0. The HMAC covers the entire EID-AD.</t>

            <t>PKT-AD Length: length (in bytes) of the Packet Authentication
            Data (PKT-AD).</t>

            <t>PKT HMAC ID: Identifier of the HMAC algorithm used to protect
            the integrity of the Map-reply Location Data.</t>

            <t>PKT HMAC: HMAC of the whole Map-Reply packet, including the
            LISP-SEC Authentication Data. The scope of the authentication goes
            from the Map-Reply Type field to the PKT HMAC field included.
            Before computing the HMAC operation the PKT HMAC field MUST be set
            to 0. See <xref target="etr"></xref> for more details.</t>
          </list></t>
      </section>

      <section title="Map-Register LISP-SEC Extentions">
        <t>The second bit after the Type field in a Map-Register message is
        allocated as the S bit. The S bit indicates to the Map-Server that the
        registering ETR is LISP-SEC enabled. An ETR that supports LISP-SEC
        MUST set the S bit in its Map-Register messages.</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="itr" title="ITR Processing">
        <t>Upon creating a Map-Request, the ITR generates a random ITR-OTK
        that is stored locally, together with the nonce generated as specified
        in <xref target="RFC6830"></xref>.</t>

        <t>The Map-Request MUST be encapsulated in an ECM, with the S-bit set
        to 1, to indicate the presence of Authentication Data. If the ITR and
        the Map-Resolver are configured with a shared key, the ITR-OTK
        confidentiality SHOULD be protected by wrapping the ITR-OTK with the
        algorithm specified by the OTK Encryption ID field. See <xref
        target="encryption"></xref> for further details on OTK encryption.</t>

        <t>The Requested HMAC ID field contains the suggested HMAC algorithm
        to be used by the Map-Server and the ETR to protect the integrity of
        the ECM Authentication data and of the Map-Reply.</t>

        <t>The KDF ID field, specifies the suggested key derivation function
        to be used by the Map-Server to derive the MS-OTK.</t>

        <t>The EID-AD length is set to 4 bytes, since the Authentication Data
        does not contain EID-prefix Authentication Data, and the EID-AD
        contains only the KDF ID field.</t>

        <t>In response to an encapsulated Map-Request that has the S-bit set,
        an ITR MUST receive a Map-Reply with the S-bit set, that includes an
        EID-AD and a PKT-AD. If the Map-Reply does not include both ADs, the
        ITR MUST discard it. In response to an encapsulated Map-Request with
        S-bit set to 0, the ITR expects a Map-Reply with S-bit set to 0, and
        the ITR SHOULD discard the Map-Reply if the S-bit is set.</t>

        <t>Upon receiving a Map-Reply, the ITR must verify the integrity of
        both the EID-AD and the PKT-AD, and MUST discard the Map-Reply if one
        of the integrity checks fails.</t>

        <t>The integrity of the EID-AD is verified using the locally stored
        ITR-OTK to re-compute the HMAC of the EID-AD using the algorithm
        specified in the EID HMAC ID field. If the EID HMAC ID field does not
        match the Requested HMAC ID the ITR SHOULD discard the Map-Reply and
        send, at the first opportunity it needs to, a new Map-Request with a
        different Requested HMAC ID field, according to ITR's local policy.
        The ITR MUST set the EID HMAC ID field to 0 before computing the
        HMAC.</t>

        <t>To verify the integrity of the PKT-AD, first the MS-OTK is derived
        from the locally stored ITR-OTK using the algorithm specified in the
        KDF ID field. This is because the PKT-AD is generated by the ETR using
        the MS-OTK. If the KDF ID in the Map-Reply does not match the KDF ID
        requested in the Map-Request, the ITR SHOULD discard the Map-Reply and
        send, at the first opportunity it needs to, a new Map-Request with a
        different KDF ID, according to ITR's local policy. The derived MS-OTK
        is then used to re-compute the HMAC of the PKT-AD using the Algorithm
        specified in the PKT HMAC ID field. If the PKT HMAC ID field does not
        match the Requested HMAC ID the ITR SHOULD discard the Map-Reply and
        send, at the first opportunity it needs to, a new Map-Request with a
        different Requested HMAC ID according to ITR's local policy.</t>

        <t>Each individual Map-Reply EID-record is considered valid only if:
        (1) both EID-AD and PKT-AD are valid, and (2) the intersection of the
        EID-prefix in the Map-Reply EID-record with one of the EID-prefixes
        contained in the EID-AD is not empty. After identifying the Map-Reply
        record as valid, the ITR sets the EID-prefix in the Map-Reply record
        to the value of the intersection set computed before, and adds the
        Map-Reply EID-record to its EID-to-RLOC cache, as described in <xref
        target="RFC6830"></xref>. An example of Map-Reply record validation is
        provided in <xref target="validation"></xref>.</t>

        <t>The ITR SHOULD send SMR triggered Map-Requests over the mapping
        system in order to receive a secure Map-Reply. If an ITR accepts
        piggybacked Map-Replies, it SHOULD also send a Map-Request over the
        mapping system in order to securely verify the piggybacked
        Map-Reply.</t>

        <t></t>

        <section anchor="validation" title="Map-Reply Record Validation">
          <t>The payload of a Map-Reply may contain multiple EID-records. The
          whole Map-Reply is signed by the ETR, with the PKT HMAC, to provide
          integrity protection and origin authentication to the EID-prefix
          records claimed by the ETR. The Authentication Data field of a
          Map-Reply may contain multiple EID-records in the EID-AD. The EID-AD
          is signed by the Map-Server, with the EID HMAC, to provide integrity
          protection and origin authentication to the EID-prefix records
          inserted by the Map-Server.</t>

          <t>Upon receiving a Map-Reply with the S-bit set, the ITR first
          checks the validity of both the EID HMAC and of the PKT-AD HMAC. If
          either one of the HMACs is not valid, a log message is issued and
          the Map-Reply is not processed any further. If both HMACs are valid,
          the ITR proceeds with validating each individual EID-record claimed
          by the ETR by computing the intersection of each one of the
          EID-prefix contained in the payload of the Map-Reply with each one
          of the EID-prefixes contained in the EID-AD. An EID-record is valid
          only if at least one of the intersections is not the empty set.</t>

          <t>For instance, the Map-Reply payload contains 3 mapping record
          EID-prefixes:<list style="empty">
              <t>1.1.1.0/24</t>

              <t>1.1.2.0/24</t>

              <t>1.2.0.0/16</t>
            </list>The EID-AD contains two EID-prefixes: <list style="empty">
              <t>1.1.2.0/24</t>

              <t>1.2.3.0/24</t>
            </list>The EID-record with EID-prefix 1.1.1.0/24 is not processed
          since it is not included in any of the EID-ADs signed by the
          Map-Server. A log message is issued.</t>

          <t>The EID-record with EID-prefix 1.1.2.0/24 is stored in the
          map-cache because it matches the second EID-prefix contained in the
          EID-AD.</t>

          <t>The EID-record with EID-prefix 1.2.0.0/16 is not processed since
          it is not included in any of the EID-ADs signed by the Map-Server. A
          log message is issued. In this last example the ETR is trying to
          over claim the EID-prefix 1.2.0.0/16, but the Map-Server authorized
          only 1.2.3.0/24, hence the EID-record is discarded.</t>
        </section>

        <section anchor="pitr" title="PITR Processing">
          <t>The processing performed by a PITR is equivalent to the
          processing of an ITR. However, if the PITR is directly connected to
          the ALT, the PITR performs the functions of both the ITR and the
          Map-Resolver forwarding the Map-Request encapsulated in an ECM
          header that includes the Authentication Data fields as described in
          <xref target="map-resolver"></xref>.</t>
        </section>
      </section>

      <section anchor="encryption" title="Encrypting and Decrypting an OTK ">
        <t>MS-OTK confidentiality is required in the path between the
        Map-Server and the ETR, the MS-OTK SHOULD be encrypted using the
        preconfigured key shared between the Map-Server and the ETR for the
        purpose of securing ETR registration <xref target="RFC6833"></xref>.
        Similarly, if ITR-OTK confidentiality is required in the path between
        the ITR and the Map-Resolver, the ITR-OTK SHOULD be encrypted with a
        key shared between the ITR and the Map-Resolver.</t>

        <t>The OTK is encrypted using the algorithm specified in the OTK
        Encryption ID field. When the AES Key Wrap algorithm is used to
        encrypt a 128-bit OTK, according to [RFC3339], the AES Key Wrap
        Initialization Value MUST be set to 0xA6A6A6A6A6A6A6A6 (64 bits). The
        output of the AES Key Wrap operation is 192-bit long. The most
        significant 64-bit are copied in the One-Time Key Preamble field,
        while the 128 less significant bits are copied in the One-Time Key
        field of the LISP-SEC Authentication Data.</t>

        <t>When decrypting an encrypted OTK the receiver MUST verify that the
        Initialization Value resulting from the AES Key Wrap decryption
        operation is equal to 0xA6A6A6A6A6A6A6A6. If this verification fails
        the receiver MUST discard the entire message.</t>

        <t>When a 128-bit OTK is sent unencrypted the OTK Encryption ID is set
        to NULL_KEY_WRAP_128, and the OTK Preamble is set to
        0x0000000000000000 (64 bits).</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="map-resolver" title="Map-Resolver Processing">
        <t>Upon receiving an encapsulated Map-Request with the S-bit set, the
        Map-Resolver decapsulates the ECM message. The ITR-OTK, if encrypted,
        is decrypted as specified in <xref target="encryption"></xref>.</t>

        <t>The Map-Resolver, as specified in <xref target="RFC6833"></xref>,
        originates a new ECM header with the S-bit set, that contains the
        unencrypted ITR-OTK, as specified in <xref
        target="encryption"></xref>, and the other data derived from the ECM
        Authentication Data of the received encapsulated Map-Request.</t>

        <t>The Map-Resolver then forwards the received Map-Request,
        encapsulated in the new ECM header that includes the newly computed
        Authentication Data fields.</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="map-server" title="Map-Server Processing">
        <t>Upon receiving an ECM encapsulated Map-Request with the S-bit set,
        the Map-Server process the Map-Request according to the value of the
        S-bit contained in the Map-Register sent by the ETR during
        registration.</t>

        <t>If the S-bit contained in the Map-Register was clear the Map-Server
        decapsulates the ECM and generates a new ECM encapsulated Map-Request
        that does not contain an ECM Authentication Data, as specified in
        <xref target="RFC6830"></xref>. The Map-Server does not perform any
        further LISP-SEC processing.</t>

        <t>If the S-bit contained in the Map-Register was set the Map-Server
        decapsulates the ECM and generates a new ECM Authentication Data. The
        Authentication Data includes the OTK-AD and the EID-AD, that contains
        EID-prefix authorization information, that are ultimately sent to the
        requesting ITR.</t>

        <t>The Map-Server updates the OTK-AD by deriving a new OTK (MS-OTK)
        from the ITR-OTK received with the Map-Request. MS-OTK is derived
        applying the key derivation function specified in the KDF ID field. If
        the algorithm specified in the KDF ID field is not supported, the
        Map-Server uses a different algorithm to derive the key and updates
        the KDF ID field accordingly.</t>

        <t>The Map-Server and the ETR MUST be configured with a shared key for
        mapping registration according to <xref target="RFC6833"></xref>. If
        MS-OTK confidentiality is required, then the MS-OTK SHOULD be
        encrypted, by wrapping the MS-OTK with the algorithm specified by the
        OTK Encryption ID field as specified in <xref
        target="encryption"></xref>.</t>

        <t>The Map-Server includes in the EID-AD the longest match registered
        EID-prefix for the destination EID, and an HMAC of this EID-prefix.
        The HMAC is keyed with the ITR-OTK contained in the received ECM
        Authentication Data, and the HMAC algorithm is chosen according to the
        Requested HMAC ID field. If The Map-Server does not support this
        algorithm, the Map-Server uses a different algorithm and specifies it
        in the EID HMAC ID field. The scope of the HMAC operation covers the
        entire EID-AD, from the EID-AD Length field to the EID HMAC field,
        which must be set to 0 before the computation.</t>

        <t>The Map-Server then forwards the updated ECM encapsulated
        Map-Request, that contains the OTK-AD, the EID-AD, and the received
        Map-Request to an authoritative ETR as specified in <xref
        target="RFC6830"></xref>.</t>

        <section anchor="proxy" title="Map-Server Processing in Proxy mode">
          <t>If the Map-Server is in proxy mode, it generates a Map-Reply, as
          specified in <xref target="RFC6830"></xref>, with the S-bit set to
          1. The Map-Reply includes the Authentication Data that contains the
          EID-AD, computed as specified in <xref target="map-server"></xref>,
          as well as the PKT-AD computed as specified in <xref
          target="etr"></xref>.</t>
        </section>
      </section>

      <section anchor="etr" title="ETR Processing">
        <t>Upon receiving an ECM encapsulated Map-Request with the S-bit set,
        the ETR decapsulates the ECM message. The OTK field, if encrypted, is
        decrypted as specified in <xref target="encryption"></xref> to obtain
        the unencrypted MS-OTK.</t>

        <t>The ETR then generates a Map-Reply as specified in <xref
        target="RFC6830"></xref> and includes the Authentication Data that
        contains the EID-AD, as received in the encapsulated Map-Request, as
        well as the PKT-AD.</t>

        <t>The EID-AD is copied from the Authentication Data of the received
        encapsulated Map-Request.</t>

        <t>The PKT-AD contains the HMAC of the whole Map-Reply packet, keyed
        with the MS-OTK and computed using the HMAC algorithm specified in the
        Requested HMAC ID field of the received encapsulated Map-Request. If
        the ETR does not support the Requested HMAC ID, it uses a different
        algorithm and updates the PKT HMAC ID field accordingly. The scope of
        the HMAC operation covers the entire PKT-AD, from the Map-Reply Type
        field to the PKT HMAC field, which must be set to 0 before the
        computation.</t>

        <t>Finally the ETR sends the Map-Reply to the requesting ITR as
        specified in <xref target="RFC6830"></xref>.</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section anchor="security" title="Security Considerations">
      <t></t>

      <section anchor="mapping-system" title="Mapping System Security">
        <t>The LISP-SEC threat model described in <xref
        target="threat-model"></xref>, assumes that the LISP Mapping System is
        working properly and eventually delivers Map-Request messages to a
        Map-Server that is authoritative for the requested EID.</t>

        <t>Map-Register security, including the right for a LISP entity to
        register an EID-prefix or to claim presence at an RLOC, is out of the
        scope of LISP-SEC.</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="random" title="Random Number Generation">
        <t>The ITR-OTK MUST be generated by a properly seeded pseudo-random
        (or strong random) source. See <xref target="RFC4086"></xref> for
        advice on generating security-sensitive random data</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="colocation" title="Map-Server and ETR Colocation">
        <t>If the Map-Server and the ETR are colocated, LISP-SEC does not
        provide protection from overclaiming attacks mounted by the ETR.
        However, in this particular case, since the ETR is within the trust
        boundaries of the Map-Server, ETR's overclaiming attacks are not
        included in the threat model.</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section anchor="IANA" title="IANA Considerations">
      <t></t>

      <section anchor="HMAC" title="HMAC functions">
        <t>The following HMAC ID values are defined by this memo for use as
        Requested HMAC ID, EID HMAC ID, and PKT HMAC ID in the LISP-SEC
        Authentication Data:</t>

        <t><figure align="center" suppress-title="true" title="HMAC Functions">
            <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[
Name                     Number        Defined In
-------------------------------------------------
NONE                     0           
AUTH-HMAC-SHA-1-96       1             [RFC2104]
AUTH-HMAC-SHA-256-128    2             [RFC4634]

values 2-65535 are reserved to IANA.]]></artwork>
          </figure></t>

        <t>AUTH-HMAC-SHA-1-96 MUST be supported, AUTH-HMAC-SHA-256-128 should
        be supported.</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="wrap" title="Key Wrap Functions">
        <t>The following OTK Encryption ID values are defined by this memo for
        use as OTK key wrap algorithms ID in the LISP-SEC Authentication
        Data:</t>

        <figure align="center" suppress-title="true"
                title="Key Wrap Functions">
          <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[
Name                     Number        Defined In
-------------------------------------------------
NULL-KEY-WRAP-128        1           
AES-KEY-WRAP-128         2             [RFC3394]

values 0 and 3-65535 are reserved to IANA.]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>NULL-KEY-WRAP-128, and AES-KEY-WRAP-128 MUST be supported.</t>

        <t>NULL-KEY-WRAP-128 is used to carry an unencrypted 128-bit OTK, with
        a 64-bit preamble set to 0x0000000000000000 (64 bits).</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="kdf" title="Key Derivation Functions">
        <t>The following KDF ID values are defined by this memo for use as KDF
        ID in the LISP-SEC Authentication Data:</t>

        <figure align="center" suppress-title="true"
                title="Key Derivation Functions">
          <artwork align="center"><![CDATA[
Name                     Number        Defined In
-------------------------------------------------
NONE                     0           
HKDF-SHA1-128            1             [RFC5869]

values 2-65535 are reserved to IANA.]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>HKDF-SHA1-128 MUST be supported</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section anchor="Acknowledgements" title="Acknowledgements">
      <t>The authors would like to acknowledge Pere Monclus, Dave Meyer, Dino
      Farinacci, Brian Weis, David McGrew, Darrel Lewis and Landon Curt Noll
      for their valuable suggestions provided during the preparation of this
      document.</t>
    </section>
  </middle>

  <back>
    <references title="Normative References">
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.6830"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.6833"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.7835"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.5226"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.4086"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.2104"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.3394"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.5869"?>
    </references>
  </back>
</rfc>
