Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) J. Arkko
Request for Comments: 6309 A. Keranen
Obsoletes: 4909 J. Mattsson
Updates: 3830, 4563, 5410, 6043 Ericsson
Category: Standards Track August 2011
IANA Rules for MIKEY (Multimedia Internet KEYing)
This document clarifies and relaxes the IANA rules for Multimedia
Internet KEYing (MIKEY). This document updates RFCs 3830, 4563,
5410, and 6043; it obsoletes RFC 4909.
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
This document relaxes the IANA rules for Multimedia Internet KEYing
(MIKEY) [RFC3830]. The IANA rules defined in [RFC3830], [RFC4563],
[RFC4909], and [RFC5410] are affected. In addition, the rules
specified in [RFC6043] are re-specified here.
Most of the values in MIKEY namespaces are divided into two ranges:
"IETF Review" (or "IETF Consensus" as it was previously called) and
"Reserved for Private Use" [RFC5226]. This document changes, for
majority of the namespaces, the requirement of "IETF Review" to "IETF
Review or IESG Approval" [RFC5226]. For some namespaces, the
requirement is changed to "Specification Required" [RFC5226].
The rationale for this update is that there can be situations where
it makes sense to grant an allocation under special circumstances or
that time has shown that the current requirement is unnecessarily
strict for some of the namespaces. By changing the current IANA
rules to also allow for "IESG Approval" [RFC5226], it becomes
possible for the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) to
consider an allocation request, even if it does not fulfill the
default rule. For instance, an experimental protocol extension could
perhaps deserve a new payload type as long as a sufficient number of
types still remains, and the MIKEY community is happy with such an
allocation. Moreover, for some registries, a stable specification
would be a sufficient requirement, and this is thus reflected in the
updated IANA rules. For instance, an RFC via the Independent Stream
at the RFC Editor is sufficient for some registries and does not
force an IETF evaluation of a particular new extension for which
there is no general demand. Nevertheless, "IETF Review" is still
encouraged (instead of using the "IESG Approval" path) if there is
doubt about whether or not it is needed for a new allocation.
The rest of this document is structured as follows. Section 2
defines the new IANA rules. Section 3 discusses the security
implications of this document. Sections 4, 5, 6, and 7 explain the
changes to [RFC3830], [RFC4563], [RFC4909], [RFC5410], and [RFC6043].
2. IANA Considerations
IANA updated the registries related to MIKEY as specified below. All
other MIKEY IANA registries remain unchanged.
New values for the version field ([RFC3830], Section 6.1) and the C
envelope key cache indicator ([RFC3830], Section 6.3) field can be
allocated via "IETF Review".
The "IETF Review" requirement for the following registries,
originally defined in [RFC3830], [RFC4563], [RFC4909], and [RFC5410],
is to be changed to "Specification Required".
o Prot type ([RFC3830], Section 6.10)
o Error no ([RFC3830], Section 6.12)
o General Extension Type ([RFC3830], Section 6.15)
o KEY ID Type ([RFC4563], Section 4)
o OMA BCAST Data Subtype ([RFC5410], Section 3)
The "Specification Required" requirement remains for the following
o TS Role ([RFC6043], Section 6.4)
o ID Role ([RFC6043], Section 6.6)
o RAND Role ([RFC6043], Section 6.8)
o Ticket Type ([RFC6043], Section 6.10)
The range of valid values for certain namespaces defined in the IANA
considerations of [RFC3830] was not explicitly defined and is
clarified here as follows:
| Namespace | Valid values |
| C Envelope Key Cache Indicator | 0 - 3 |
| S type | 0 - 15 |
| Key Data Type | 0 - 15 |
| KV Type | 0 - 15 |
3. Security Considerations
This specification does not change the security properties of MIKEY.
However, when new values are introduced without IETF consensus, care
needs to be taken to assure that possible security concerns regarding
the new values are still addressed.
4. Changes from RFC 3830
Section 2 relaxes the requirements from those defined in [RFC3830].
A number of namespaces now have the "IETF Review or IESG Approval"
requirement, when they previously had the "IETF Review" requirement.
In addition, some namespaces now have the "Specification Required"
5. Changes from RFC 4563
Section 2 relaxes the requirements from those defined in [RFC4563].
The KEY ID Type namespace now has the "Specification Required"
6. Changes from RFC 4909 and RFC 5410
Section 2 relaxes the requirements from those defined in [RFC4909].
The OMA BCAST Data Subtype namespace now has the "Specification
Required" requirement. Note that [RFC5410] obsoleted [RFC4909] but
does not actually define the IANA rules itself. As a result, from
now on, this RFC defines the IANA requirements for the OMA BCAST Data
7. Changes from RFC 6043
There are no changes to the rules specified in [RFC6043]. However,
for sake of completeness, Section 2 re-specifies these rules in this
document, and from now on, this RFC defines the IANA requirements for
8.1. Normative References
[RFC3830] Arkko, J., Carrara, E., Lindholm, F., Naslund, M., and K.
Norrman, "MIKEY: Multimedia Internet KEYing", RFC 3830,
[RFC4563] Carrara, E., Lehtovirta, V., and K. Norrman, "The Key ID
Information Type for the General Extension Payload in
Multimedia Internet KEYing (MIKEY)", RFC 4563, June 2006.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
[RFC5410] Jerichow, A. and L. Piron, "Multimedia Internet KEYing
(MIKEY) General Extension Payload for Open Mobile Alliance
BCAST 1.0", RFC 5410, January 2009.
[RFC6043] Mattsson, J. and T. Tian, "MIKEY-TICKET: Ticket-Based
Modes of Key Distribution in Multimedia Internet KEYing
(MIKEY)", RFC 6043, March 2011.
8.2. Informative References
[RFC4909] Dondeti, L., Castleford, D., and F. Hartung, "Multimedia
Internet KEYing (MIKEY) General Extension Payload for Open
Mobile Alliance BCAST LTKM/STKM Transport", RFC 4909,
Stockholm SE-164 80