PKI
PKI (Public Key Infrastructure) for the Internet
Within this page
PKI subjects:
PKI RFCs (76)
RFC 10002: Certificate Management over CMS (CMC)
Proposed Standard- J. Mandel
- S. Turner
- July 2026
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document defines the base syntax for CMC, a Certificate Management protocol using the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). This protocol addresses two immediate needs within the Internet Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) community:
CMC also requires the use of the transport document (RFC 10003) and the requirements usage document (RFC 10004) along with this document for a full definition.
This document obsoletes RFCs 5272 and 6402.
Abstract
This document defines the base syntax for CMC, a Certificate Management protocol using the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). This protocol addresses two immediate needs within the Internet Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) community:
CMC also requires the use of the transport document (RFC 10003) and the requirements usage document (RFC 10004) along with this document for a full definition.
This document obsoletes RFCs 5272 and 6402.
RFC 10003: Certificate Management over CMS (CMC): Transport Protocols
Proposed Standard- J. Mandel
- S. Turner
- July 2026
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document defines a number of transport mechanisms that are used to move Certificate Management over CMS (CMC) messages. The transport mechanisms described in this document are HTTP, file, mail, and TCP.
This document obsoletes RFCs 5273 and 6402.
Abstract
This document defines a number of transport mechanisms that are used to move Certificate Management over CMS (CMC) messages. The transport mechanisms described in this document are HTTP, file, mail, and TCP.
This document obsoletes RFCs 5273 and 6402.
RFC 10004: Certificate Management over CMS (CMC): Compliance Requirements
Proposed Standard- J. Mandel
- S. Turner
- July 2026
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document provides a set of compliance statements about the Certificate Management over CMS (CMC) enrollment protocol. The ASN.1 structures and the transport mechanisms for the CMC enrollment protocol are covered in other documents (RFCs 10002 and 10003). This document provides the information needed to make a compliant version of CMC.
This document obsoletes RFCs 5274 and 6402.
Abstract
This document provides a set of compliance statements about the Certificate Management over CMS (CMC) enrollment protocol. The ASN.1 structures and the transport mechanisms for the CMC enrollment protocol are covered in other documents (RFCs 10002 and 10003). This document provides the information needed to make a compliant version of CMC.
This document obsoletes RFCs 5274 and 6402.
RFC 10007: Clarification to Processing Key Usage Values During Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Validation
Proposed Standard- C. Bonnell
- T. Ito
- T. Okubo
- June 2026
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
RFC 5280 defines the profile of X.509 certificates and Certificate Revocation Lists (CRLs) for use in the Internet. Section 4.2.1.3 of RFC 5280 requires CRL issuer certificates to contain the keyUsage extension with the cRLSign bit asserted. However, the CRL validation algorithm specified in Section 6.3 of RFC 5280 does not explicitly include a corresponding check for the presence of the keyUsage certificate extension. This document updates RFC 5280 to require that check.
Abstract
RFC 5280 defines the profile of X.509 certificates and Certificate Revocation Lists (CRLs) for use in the Internet. Section 4.2.1.3 of RFC 5280 requires CRL issuer certificates to contain the keyUsage extension with the cRLSign bit asserted. However, the CRL validation algorithm specified in Section 6.3 of RFC 5280 does not explicitly include a corresponding check for the presence of the keyUsage certificate extension. This document updates RFC 5280 to require that check.
RFC 9936: Use of ML-KEM in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)
Proposed Standard- J. Prat
- M. Ounsworth
- D. Van Geest
- March 2026
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
Module-Lattice-Based Key-Encapsulation Mechanism (ML-KEM) is a quantum-resistant Key Encapsulation Mechanism (KEM). Three parameter sets for the ML-KEM algorithm are specified by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in FIPS 203. In order of increasing security strength (and decreasing performance), these parameter sets are ML-KEM-512, ML-KEM-768, and ML-KEM-1024. This document specifies the conventions for using ML-KEM with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) using the KEMRecipientInfo structure defined in "Using Key Encapsulation Mechanism (KEM) Algorithms in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)" (RFC 9629).
Abstract
Module-Lattice-Based Key-Encapsulation Mechanism (ML-KEM) is a quantum-resistant Key Encapsulation Mechanism (KEM). Three parameter sets for the ML-KEM algorithm are specified by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in FIPS 203. In order of increasing security strength (and decreasing performance), these parameter sets are ML-KEM-512, ML-KEM-768, and ML-KEM-1024. This document specifies the conventions for using ML-KEM with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) using the KEMRecipientInfo structure defined in "Using Key Encapsulation Mechanism (KEM) Algorithms in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)" (RFC 9629).
RFC 9939: PKCS #8: Private-Key Information Content Types
Proposed Standard- J. Mandel
- R. Housley
- S. Turner
- February 2026
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document defines PKCS #8 content types for use with PrivateKeyInfo and EncryptedPrivateKeyInfo as specified in RFC 5958.
Abstract
This document defines PKCS #8 content types for use with PrivateKeyInfo and EncryptedPrivateKeyInfo as specified in RFC 5958.
RFC 9908: Clarification and Enhancement of the CSR Attributes Definition in RFC 7030
Proposed Standard- M. Richardson
- O. Friel
- D. von Oheimb
- D. Harkins
- January 2026
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document updates RFC 7030, "Enrollment over Secure Transport" (EST), clarifying how the Certificate Signing Request (CSR) Attributes Response can be used by an EST server to specify both CSR attribute Object Identifiers (OIDs) and CSR attribute values, particularly X.509 extension values, that the server expects the client to include in a subsequent CSR request. RFC 9148 is derived from RFC 7030 and is also updated.
RFC 7030 is ambiguous in its specification of the CSR Attributes Response. This has resulted in implementation challenges and implementor confusion because there was no universal understanding of what was specified. This document clarifies the encoding rules.
This document also provides a new straightforward approach: using a template for CSR contents that may be partially filled in by the server. This also allows an EST server to specify a subject Distinguished Name (DN).
Abstract
This document updates RFC 7030, "Enrollment over Secure Transport" (EST), clarifying how the Certificate Signing Request (CSR) Attributes Response can be used by an EST server to specify both CSR attribute Object Identifiers (OIDs) and CSR attribute values, particularly X.509 extension values, that the server expects the client to include in a subsequent CSR request. RFC 9148 is derived from RFC 7030 and is also updated.
RFC 7030 is ambiguous in its specification of the CSR Attributes Response. This has resulted in implementation challenges and implementor confusion because there was no universal understanding of what was specified. This document clarifies the encoding rules.
This document also provides a new straightforward approach: using a template for CSR contents that may be partially filled in by the server. This also allows an EST server to specify a subject Distinguished Name (DN).
RFC 9882: Use of the ML-DSA Signature Algorithm in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)
Proposed Standard- B. Salter
- A. Raine
- D. Van Geest
- October 2025
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
The Module-Lattice-Based Digital Signature Algorithm (ML-DSA), as defined by NIST in FIPS 204, is a post-quantum digital signature scheme that aims to be secure against an adversary in possession of a Cryptographically Relevant Quantum Computer (CRQC). This document specifies the conventions for using the ML-DSA signature algorithm with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). In addition, the algorithm identifier syntax is provided.
Abstract
The Module-Lattice-Based Digital Signature Algorithm (ML-DSA), as defined by NIST in FIPS 204, is a post-quantum digital signature scheme that aims to be secure against an adversary in possession of a Cryptographically Relevant Quantum Computer (CRQC). This document specifies the conventions for using the ML-DSA signature algorithm with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). In addition, the algorithm identifier syntax is provided.
RFC 9883: An Attribute for Statement of Possession of a Private Key
Proposed Standard- R. Housley
- October 2025
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document specifies an attribute for a statement of possession of a private key by a certificate subject. As part of X.509 certificate enrollment, a Certification Authority (CA) typically demands proof that the subject possesses the private key that corresponds to the to-be-certified public key. In some cases, a CA might accept a signed statement from the certificate subject. For example, when a certificate subject needs separate certificates for signature and key establishment, a statement that can be validated with the previously issued signature certificate for the same subject might be adequate for subsequent issuance of the key establishment certificate.
Abstract
This document specifies an attribute for a statement of possession of a private key by a certificate subject. As part of X.509 certificate enrollment, a Certification Authority (CA) typically demands proof that the subject possesses the private key that corresponds to the to-be-certified public key. In some cases, a CA might accept a signed statement from the certificate subject. For example, when a certificate subject needs separate certificates for signature and key establishment, a statement that can be validated with the previously issued signature certificate for the same subject might be adequate for subsequent issuance of the key establishment certificate.
RFC 9879: Use of Password-Based Message Authentication Code 1 (PBMAC1) in PKCS #12 Syntax
Informational- A. Kario
- September 2025
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document specifies additions and amendments to RFCs 7292 and 8018. It also obsoletes the RFC 9579. It defines a way to use the Password-Based Message Authentication Code 1 (PBMAC1), defined in RFC 8018, inside the PKCS #12 syntax. The purpose of this specification is to permit the use of more modern Password-Based Key Derivation Functions (PBKDFs) and allow for regulatory compliance.
Abstract
This document specifies additions and amendments to RFCs 7292 and 8018. It also obsoletes the RFC 9579. It defines a way to use the Password-Based Message Authentication Code 1 (PBMAC1), defined in RFC 8018, inside the PKCS #12 syntax. The purpose of this specification is to permit the use of more modern Password-Based Key Derivation Functions (PBKDFs) and allow for regulatory compliance.
RFC 9787: Guidance on End-to-End Email Security
Informational- D. K. Gillmor
- A. Melnikov
- B. Hoeneisen
- August 2025
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
End-to-end cryptographic protections for email messages can provide useful security. However, the standards for providing cryptographic protection are extremely flexible. That flexibility can trap users and cause surprising failures. This document offers guidance for Mail User Agent (MUA) implementers to help mitigate those risks and to make end-to-end email simple and secure for the end user. It provides a useful set of vocabulary as well as recommendations to avoid common failures. It also identifies a number of currently unsolved usability and interoperability problems.
Abstract
End-to-end cryptographic protections for email messages can provide useful security. However, the standards for providing cryptographic protection are extremely flexible. That flexibility can trap users and cause surprising failures. This document offers guidance for Mail User Agent (MUA) implementers to help mitigate those risks and to make end-to-end email simple and secure for the end user. It provides a useful set of vocabulary as well as recommendations to avoid common failures. It also identifies a number of currently unsolved usability and interoperability problems.
RFC 9788: Header Protection for Cryptographically Protected Email
Proposed Standard- D. K. Gillmor
- B. Hoeneisen
- A. Melnikov
- August 2025
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
S/MIME version 3.1 introduced a mechanism to provide end-to-end cryptographic protection of email message headers. However, few implementations generate messages using this mechanism, and several legacy implementations have revealed rendering or security issues when handling such a message.
This document updates the S/MIME specification (RFC 8551) to offer a different mechanism that provides the same cryptographic protections but with fewer downsides when handled by legacy clients. Furthermore, it offers more explicit usability, privacy, and security guidance for clients when generating or handling email messages with cryptographic protection of message headers.
The Header Protection scheme defined here is also applicable to messages with PGP/MIME (Pretty Good Privacy with MIME) cryptographic protections.
Abstract
S/MIME version 3.1 introduced a mechanism to provide end-to-end cryptographic protection of email message headers. However, few implementations generate messages using this mechanism, and several legacy implementations have revealed rendering or security issues when handling such a message.
This document updates the S/MIME specification (RFC 8551) to offer a different mechanism that provides the same cryptographic protections but with fewer downsides when handled by legacy clients. Furthermore, it offers more explicit usability, privacy, and security guidance for clients when generating or handling email messages with cryptographic protection of message headers.
The Header Protection scheme defined here is also applicable to messages with PGP/MIME (Pretty Good Privacy with MIME) cryptographic protections.
RFC 9814: Use of the SLH-DSA Signature Algorithm in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)
Proposed Standard- R. Housley
- S. Fluhrer
- P. Kampanakis
- B. Westerbaan
- July 2025
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
SLH-DSA is a stateless hash-based signature algorithm. This document specifies the conventions for using the SLH-DSA signature algorithm with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). In addition, the algorithm identifier and public key syntax are provided.
Abstract
SLH-DSA is a stateless hash-based signature algorithm. This document specifies the conventions for using the SLH-DSA signature algorithm with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). In addition, the algorithm identifier and public key syntax are provided.
RFC 9804: Simple Public Key Infrastructure (SPKI) S-Expressions
Informational- R. Rivest
- D. Eastlake 3rd
- June 2025
- IETF publication
Abstract
This memo specifies the data structure representation that was devised to support Simple Public Key Infrastructure (SPKI) certificates, as detailed in RFC 2692, with the intent that it be more widely applicable. It has been and is being used elsewhere. There are multiple implementations in a variety of programming languages. Uses of this representation are referred to in this document as "S-expressions". This memo makes precise the encodings of these SPKI S-expressions: It gives a "canonical form" for them, describes two "transport" representations, and also describes an "advanced" format for display to people.
Abstract
This memo specifies the data structure representation that was devised to support Simple Public Key Infrastructure (SPKI) certificates, as detailed in RFC 2692, with the intent that it be more widely applicable. It has been and is being used elsewhere. There are multiple implementations in a variety of programming languages. Uses of this representation are referred to in this document as "S-expressions". This memo makes precise the encodings of these SPKI S-expressions: It gives a "canonical form" for them, describes two "transport" representations, and also describes an "advanced" format for display to people.
RFC 9690: Use of the RSA-KEM Algorithm in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)
Proposed Standard- R. Housley
- S. Turner
- February 2025
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
The RSA Key Encapsulation Mechanism (RSA-KEM) algorithm is a one-pass (store-and-forward) cryptographic mechanism for an originator to securely send keying material to a recipient using the recipient's RSA public key. The RSA-KEM algorithm is specified in Clause 11.5 of ISO/IEC: 18033-2:2006. This document specifies the conventions for using the RSA-KEM algorithm as a standalone KEM algorithm and the conventions for using the RSA-KEM algorithm with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) using KEMRecipientInfo as specified in RFC 9629. This document obsoletes RFC 5990.
Abstract
The RSA Key Encapsulation Mechanism (RSA-KEM) algorithm is a one-pass (store-and-forward) cryptographic mechanism for an originator to securely send keying material to a recipient using the recipient's RSA public key. The RSA-KEM algorithm is specified in Clause 11.5 of ISO/IEC: 18033-2:2006. This document specifies the conventions for using the RSA-KEM algorithm as a standalone KEM algorithm and the conventions for using the RSA-KEM algorithm with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) using KEMRecipientInfo as specified in RFC 9629. This document obsoletes RFC 5990.
RFC 9708: Use of the HSS/LMS Hash-Based Signature Algorithm in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)
Proposed Standard- R. Housley
- January 2025
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document specifies the conventions for using the Hierarchical Signature System (HSS) / Leighton-Micali Signature (LMS) hash-based signature algorithm with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). In addition, the algorithm identifier and public key syntax are provided. The HSS/LMS algorithm is one form of hash-based digital signature; it is described in RFC 8554. This document obsoletes RFC 8708.
Abstract
This document specifies the conventions for using the Hierarchical Signature System (HSS) / Leighton-Micali Signature (LMS) hash-based signature algorithm with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). In addition, the algorithm identifier and public key syntax are provided. The HSS/LMS algorithm is one form of hash-based digital signature; it is described in RFC 8554. This document obsoletes RFC 8708.
RFC 9709: Encryption Key Derivation in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) Using HKDF with SHA-256
Proposed Standard- R. Housley
- January 2025
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document specifies the derivation of the content-encryption key or the content-authenticated-encryption key in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) using the HMAC-based Extract-and-Expand Key Derivation Function (HKDF) with SHA-256. The use of this mechanism provides protection against an attacker that manipulates the content-encryption algorithm identifier or the content-authenticated-encryption algorithm identifier.
Abstract
This document specifies the derivation of the content-encryption key or the content-authenticated-encryption key in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) using the HMAC-based Extract-and-Expand Key Derivation Function (HKDF) with SHA-256. The use of this mechanism provides protection against an attacker that manipulates the content-encryption algorithm identifier or the content-authenticated-encryption algorithm identifier.
RFC 9688: Use of the SHA3 One-Way Hash Functions in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)
Proposed Standard- R. Housley
- November 2024
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document describes the conventions for using the one-way hash functions in the SHA3 family with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). The SHA3 family can be used as a message digest algorithm, as part of a signature algorithm, as part of a message authentication code, or as part of a Key Derivation Function (KDF).
Abstract
This document describes the conventions for using the one-way hash functions in the SHA3 family with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). The SHA3 family can be used as a message digest algorithm, as part of a signature algorithm, as part of a message authentication code, or as part of a Key Derivation Function (KDF).
RFC 9629: Using Key Encapsulation Mechanism (KEM) Algorithms in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)
Proposed Standard- R. Housley
- J. Gray
- T. Okubo
- August 2024
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
The Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) supports key transport and key agreement algorithms. In recent years, cryptographers have been specifying Key Encapsulation Mechanism (KEM) algorithms, including quantum-secure KEM algorithms. This document defines conventions for the use of KEM algorithms by the originator and recipients to encrypt and decrypt CMS content. This document updates RFC 5652.
Abstract
The Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) supports key transport and key agreement algorithms. In recent years, cryptographers have been specifying Key Encapsulation Mechanism (KEM) algorithms, including quantum-secure KEM algorithms. This document defines conventions for the use of KEM algorithms by the originator and recipients to encrypt and decrypt CMS content. This document updates RFC 5652.
RFC 9579: Use of Password-Based Message Authentication Code 1 (PBMAC1) in PKCS #12 Syntax
Informational- H. Kario
- May 2024
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document specifies additions and amendments to RFCs 7292 and 8018. It defines a way to use the Password-Based Message Authentication Code 1 (PBMAC1), defined in RFC 8018, inside the PKCS #12 syntax. The purpose of this specification is to permit the use of more modern Password-Based Key Derivation Functions (PBKDFs) and allow for regulatory compliance.
- Obsoleted by RFC 9879
Abstract
This document specifies additions and amendments to RFCs 7292 and 8018. It defines a way to use the Password-Based Message Authentication Code 1 (PBMAC1), defined in RFC 8018, inside the PKCS #12 syntax. The purpose of this specification is to permit the use of more modern Password-Based Key Derivation Functions (PBKDFs) and allow for regulatory compliance.
RFC 9589: On the Use of the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) Signing-Time Attribute in Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Signed Objects
Proposed Standard- J. Snijders
- T. Harrison
- May 2024
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
In the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), Signed Objects are defined as Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) protected content types. A Signed Object contains a signing-time attribute, representing the purported time at which the object was signed by its issuer. RPKI repositories are accessible using the rsync and RPKI Repository Delta protocols, allowing Relying Parties (RPs) to synchronize a local copy of the RPKI repository used for validation with the remote repositories. This document describes how the CMS signing-time attribute can be used to avoid needless retransfers of data when switching between different synchronization protocols. This document updates RFC 6488 by mandating the presence of the CMS signing-time attribute and disallowing the use of the binary-signing-time attribute.
Abstract
In the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), Signed Objects are defined as Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) protected content types. A Signed Object contains a signing-time attribute, representing the purported time at which the object was signed by its issuer. RPKI repositories are accessible using the rsync and RPKI Repository Delta protocols, allowing Relying Parties (RPs) to synchronize a local copy of the RPKI repository used for validation with the remote repositories. This document describes how the CMS signing-time attribute can be used to avoid needless retransfers of data when switching between different synchronization protocols. This document updates RFC 6488 by mandating the presence of the CMS signing-time attribute and disallowing the use of the binary-signing-time attribute.
RFC 9549: Internationalization Updates to RFC 5280
Proposed Standard- R. Housley
- March 2024
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
The updates to RFC 5280 described in this document provide alignment with the 2008 specification for Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and includes support for internationalized email addresses in X.509 certificates. The updates ensure that name constraints for email addresses that contain only ASCII characters and internationalized email addresses are handled in the same manner. This document obsoletes RFC 8399.
Abstract
The updates to RFC 5280 described in this document provide alignment with the 2008 specification for Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and includes support for internationalized email addresses in X.509 certificates. The updates ensure that name constraints for email addresses that contain only ASCII characters and internationalized email addresses are handled in the same manner. This document obsoletes RFC 8399.
RFC 9421: HTTP Message Signatures
Proposed Standard- A. Backman
- J. Richer
- M. Sporny
- February 2024
- IETF publication
- Web and Internet Transport
Abstract
This document describes a mechanism for creating, encoding, and verifying digital signatures or message authentication codes over components of an HTTP message. This mechanism supports use cases where the full HTTP message may not be known to the signer and where the message may be transformed (e.g., by intermediaries) before reaching the verifier. This document also describes a means for requesting that a signature be applied to a subsequent HTTP message in an ongoing HTTP exchange.
Abstract
This document describes a mechanism for creating, encoding, and verifying digital signatures or message authentication codes over components of an HTTP message. This mechanism supports use cases where the full HTTP message may not be known to the signer and where the message may be transformed (e.g., by intermediaries) before reaching the verifier. This document also describes a means for requesting that a signature be applied to a subsequent HTTP message in an ongoing HTTP exchange.
RFC 9495: Certification Authority Authorization (CAA) Processing for Email Addresses
Proposed Standard- C. Bonnell
- October 2023
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
The Certification Authority Authorization (CAA) DNS resource record (RR) provides a mechanism for domains to express the allowed set of Certification Authorities that are authorized to issue certificates for the domain. RFC 8659 contains the core CAA specification, where Property Tags that restrict the issuance of certificates that certify domain names are defined. This specification defines a Property Tag that grants authorization to Certification Authorities to issue certificates that contain the id-kp-emailProtection key purpose in the extendedKeyUsage extension and at least one rfc822Name value or otherName value of type id-on-SmtpUTF8Mailbox that includes the domain name in the subjectAltName extension.
Abstract
The Certification Authority Authorization (CAA) DNS resource record (RR) provides a mechanism for domains to express the allowed set of Certification Authorities that are authorized to issue certificates for the domain. RFC 8659 contains the core CAA specification, where Property Tags that restrict the issuance of certificates that certify domain names are defined. This specification defines a Property Tag that grants authorization to Certification Authorities to issue certificates that contain the id-kp-emailProtection key purpose in the extendedKeyUsage extension and at least one rfc822Name value or otherName value of type id-on-SmtpUTF8Mailbox that includes the domain name in the subjectAltName extension.
RFC 9324: Policy Based on the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) without Route Refresh
Proposed Standard- R. Bush
- K. Patel
- P. Smith
- M. Tinka
- December 2022
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
A BGP speaker performing policy based on the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) should not issue route refresh to its neighbors because it has received new RPKI data. This document updates RFC 8481 by describing how to avoid doing so by either keeping a full Adj-RIB-In or saving paths dropped due to ROV (Route Origin Validation) so they may be reevaluated with respect to new RPKI data.
Abstract
A BGP speaker performing policy based on the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) should not issue route refresh to its neighbors because it has received new RPKI data. This document updates RFC 8481 by describing how to avoid doing so by either keeping a full Adj-RIB-In or saving paths dropped due to ROV (Route Origin Validation) so they may be reevaluated with respect to new RPKI data.
RFC 9319: BCP 185: The Use of maxLength in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)
Best Current Practice- Y. Gilad
- S. Goldberg
- K. Sriram
- J. Snijders
- B. Maddison
- October 2022
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
This document recommends ways to reduce the forged-origin hijack attack surface by prudently limiting the set of IP prefixes that are included in a Route Origin Authorization (ROA). One recommendation is to avoid using the maxLength attribute in ROAs except in some specific cases. The recommendations complement and extend those in RFC 7115. This document also discusses the creation of ROAs for facilitating the use of Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) mitigation services. Considerations related to ROAs and RPKI-based Route Origin Validation (RPKI-ROV) in the context of destination-based Remotely Triggered Discard Route (RTDR) (elsewhere referred to as "Remotely Triggered Black Hole") filtering are also highlighted.
Abstract
This document recommends ways to reduce the forged-origin hijack attack surface by prudently limiting the set of IP prefixes that are included in a Route Origin Authorization (ROA). One recommendation is to avoid using the maxLength attribute in ROAs except in some specific cases. The recommendations complement and extend those in RFC 7115. This document also discusses the creation of ROAs for facilitating the use of Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) mitigation services. Considerations related to ROAs and RPKI-based Route Origin Validation (RPKI-ROV) in the context of destination-based Remotely Triggered Discard Route (RTDR) (elsewhere referred to as "Remotely Triggered Black Hole") filtering are also highlighted.
RFC 9286: Manifests for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)
Proposed Standard- R. Austein
- G. Huston
- S. Kent
- M. Lepinski
- June 2022
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
This document defines a "manifest" for use in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). A manifest is a signed object (file) that contains a listing of all the signed objects (files) in the repository publication point (directory) associated with an authority responsible for publishing in the repository. For each certificate, Certificate Revocation List (CRL), or other type of signed objects issued by the authority that are published at this repository publication point, the manifest contains both the name of the file containing the object and a hash of the file content. Manifests are intended to enable a relying party (RP) to detect certain forms of attacks against a repository. Specifically, if an RP checks a manifest's contents against the signed objects retrieved from a repository publication point, then the RP can detect replay attacks, and unauthorized in-flight modification or deletion of signed objects. This document obsoletes RFC 6486.
Abstract
This document defines a "manifest" for use in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). A manifest is a signed object (file) that contains a listing of all the signed objects (files) in the repository publication point (directory) associated with an authority responsible for publishing in the repository. For each certificate, Certificate Revocation List (CRL), or other type of signed objects issued by the authority that are published at this repository publication point, the manifest contains both the name of the file containing the object and a hash of the file content. Manifests are intended to enable a relying party (RP) to detect certain forms of attacks against a repository. Specifically, if an RP checks a manifest's contents against the signed objects retrieved from a repository publication point, then the RP can detect replay attacks, and unauthorized in-flight modification or deletion of signed objects. This document obsoletes RFC 6486.
RFC 9255: The 'I' in RPKI Does Not Stand for Identity
Proposed Standard- R. Bush
- R. Housley
- June 2022
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
There is a false notion that Internet Number Resources (INRs) in the RPKI can be associated with the real-world identity of the 'holder' of an INR. This document specifies that RPKI does not associate to the INR holder.
Abstract
There is a false notion that Internet Number Resources (INRs) in the RPKI can be associated with the real-world identity of the 'holder' of an INR. This document specifies that RPKI does not associate to the INR holder.
RFC 9060: Secure Telephone Identity Revisited (STIR) Certificate Delegation
Proposed Standard- J. Peterson
- September 2021
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The Secure Telephone Identity Revisited (STIR) certificate profile provides a way to attest authority over telephone numbers and related identifiers for the purpose of preventing telephone number spoofing. This specification details how that authority can be delegated from a parent certificate to a subordinate certificate. This supports a number of use cases, including those where service providers grant credentials to enterprises or other customers capable of signing calls with STIR.
Abstract
The Secure Telephone Identity Revisited (STIR) certificate profile provides a way to attest authority over telephone numbers and related identifiers for the purpose of preventing telephone number spoofing. This specification details how that authority can be delegated from a parent certificate to a subordinate certificate. This supports a number of use cases, including those where service providers grant credentials to enterprises or other customers capable of signing calls with STIR.
RFC 9092: Finding and Using Geofeed Data
Proposed Standard- R. Bush
- M. Candela
- W. Kumari
- R. Housley
- July 2021
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
This document specifies how to augment the Routing Policy Specification Language inetnum: class to refer specifically to geofeed data comma-separated values (CSV) files and describes an optional scheme that uses the Routing Public Key Infrastructure to authenticate the geofeed data CSV files.
- Obsoleted by RFC 9632
Abstract
This document specifies how to augment the Routing Policy Specification Language inetnum: class to refer specifically to geofeed data comma-separated values (CSV) files and describes an optional scheme that uses the Routing Public Key Infrastructure to authenticate the geofeed data CSV files.
RFC 9044: Using the AES-GMAC Algorithm with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)
Proposed Standard- R. Housley
- June 2021
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document specifies the conventions for using the AES-GMAC Message Authentication Code algorithm with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) as specified in RFC 5652.
Abstract
This document specifies the conventions for using the AES-GMAC Message Authentication Code algorithm with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) as specified in RFC 5652.
RFC 8933: Update to the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) for Algorithm Identifier Protection
Proposed Standard- R. Housley
- October 2020
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document updates the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) specified in RFC 5652 to ensure that algorithm identifiers in signed-data and authenticated-data content types are adequately protected.
Abstract
This document updates the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) specified in RFC 5652 to ensure that algorithm identifiers in signed-data and authenticated-data content types are adequately protected.
RFC 8893: Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Origin Validation for BGP Export
Proposed Standard- R. Bush
- R. Volk
- J. Heitz
- September 2020
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
A BGP speaker may perform Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) origin validation not only on routes received from BGP neighbors and routes that are redistributed from other routing protocols, but also on routes it sends to BGP neighbors. For egress policy, it is important that the classification use the 'effective origin AS' of the processed route, which may specifically be altered by the commonly available knobs, such as removing private ASes, confederation handling, and other modifications of the origin AS. This document updates RFC 6811.
Abstract
A BGP speaker may perform Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) origin validation not only on routes received from BGP neighbors and routes that are redistributed from other routing protocols, but also on routes it sends to BGP neighbors. For egress policy, it is important that the classification use the 'effective origin AS' of the processed route, which may specifically be altered by the commonly available knobs, such as removing private ASes, confederation handling, and other modifications of the origin AS. This document updates RFC 6811.
RFC 8894: Simple Certificate Enrolment Protocol
Informational- P. Gutmann
- September 2020
- IETF publication
- General Area
Abstract
This document specifies the Simple Certificate Enrolment Protocol (SCEP), a PKI protocol that leverages existing technology by using Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS, formerly known as PKCS #7) and PKCS #10 over HTTP. SCEP is the evolution of the enrolment protocol sponsored by Cisco Systems, which enjoys wide support in both client and server implementations, as well as being relied upon by numerous other industry standards that work with certificates.
Abstract
This document specifies the Simple Certificate Enrolment Protocol (SCEP), a PKI protocol that leverages existing technology by using Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS, formerly known as PKCS #7) and PKCS #10 over HTTP. SCEP is the evolution of the enrolment protocol sponsored by Cisco Systems, which enjoys wide support in both client and server implementations, as well as being relied upon by numerous other industry standards that work with certificates.
RFC 8897: Requirements for Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Relying Parties
Informational- D. Ma
- S. Kent
- September 2020
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
This document provides a single reference point for requirements for Relying Party (RP) software for use in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). It cites requirements that appear in several RPKI RFCs, making it easier for implementers to become aware of these requirements. Over time, this RFC will be updated to reflect changes to the requirements and guidance specified in the RFCs discussed herein.
Abstract
This document provides a single reference point for requirements for Relying Party (RP) software for use in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). It cites requirements that appear in several RPKI RFCs, making it easier for implementers to become aware of these requirements. Over time, this RFC will be updated to reflect changes to the requirements and guidance specified in the RFCs discussed herein.
RFC 8708: Use of the HSS/LMS Hash-Based Signature Algorithm in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)
Proposed Standard- R. Housley
- February 2020
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document specifies the conventions for using the Hierarchical Signature System (HSS) / Leighton-Micali Signature (LMS) hash-based signature algorithm with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). In addition, the algorithm identifier and public key syntax are provided. The HSS/LMS algorithm is one form of hash-based digital signature; it is described in RFC 8554.
- Obsoleted by RFC 9708
Abstract
This document specifies the conventions for using the Hierarchical Signature System (HSS) / Leighton-Micali Signature (LMS) hash-based signature algorithm with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). In addition, the algorithm identifier and public key syntax are provided. The HSS/LMS algorithm is one form of hash-based digital signature; it is described in RFC 8554.
RFC 8702: Use of the SHAKE One-Way Hash Functions in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)
Proposed Standard- P. Kampanakis
- Q. Dang
- January 2020
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document updates the "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) Algorithms" (RFC 3370) and describes the conventions for using the SHAKE family of hash functions in the Cryptographic Message Syntax as one-way hash functions with the RSA Probabilistic Signature Scheme (RSASSA-PSS) and Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA). The conventions for the associated signer public keys in CMS are also described.
Abstract
This document updates the "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) Algorithms" (RFC 3370) and describes the conventions for using the SHAKE family of hash functions in the Cryptographic Message Syntax as one-way hash functions with the RSA Probabilistic Signature Scheme (RSASSA-PSS) and Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA). The conventions for the associated signer public keys in CMS are also described.
RFC 8696: Using Pre-Shared Key (PSK) in the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)
Proposed Standard- R. Housley
- December 2019
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
The invention of a large-scale quantum computer would pose a serious challenge for the cryptographic algorithms that are widely deployed today. The Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) supports key transport and key agreement algorithms that could be broken by the invention of such a quantum computer. By storing communications that are protected with the CMS today, someone could decrypt them in the future when a large-scale quantum computer becomes available. Once quantum-secure key management algorithms are available, the CMS will be extended to support the new algorithms if the existing syntax does not accommodate them. This document describes a mechanism to protect today's communication from the future invention of a large-scale quantum computer by mixing the output of key transport and key agreement algorithms with a pre-shared key.
Abstract
The invention of a large-scale quantum computer would pose a serious challenge for the cryptographic algorithms that are widely deployed today. The Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) supports key transport and key agreement algorithms that could be broken by the invention of such a quantum computer. By storing communications that are protected with the CMS today, someone could decrypt them in the future when a large-scale quantum computer becomes available. Once quantum-secure key management algorithms are available, the CMS will be extended to support the new algorithms if the existing syntax does not accommodate them. This document describes a mechanism to protect today's communication from the future invention of a large-scale quantum computer by mixing the output of key transport and key agreement algorithms with a pre-shared key.
RFC 8659: DNS Certification Authority Authorization (CAA) Resource Record
Proposed Standard- P. Hallam-Baker
- R. Stradling
- J. Hoffman-Andrews
- November 2019
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
The Certification Authority Authorization (CAA) DNS Resource Record allows a DNS domain name holder to specify one or more Certification Authorities (CAs) authorized to issue certificates for that domain name. CAA Resource Records allow a public CA to implement additional controls to reduce the risk of unintended certificate mis-issue. This document defines the syntax of the CAA record and rules for processing CAA records by CAs.
This document obsoletes RFC 6844.
Abstract
The Certification Authority Authorization (CAA) DNS Resource Record allows a DNS domain name holder to specify one or more Certification Authorities (CAs) authorized to issue certificates for that domain name. CAA Resource Records allow a public CA to implement additional controls to reduce the risk of unintended certificate mis-issue. This document defines the syntax of the CAA record and rules for processing CAA records by CAs.
This document obsoletes RFC 6844.
RFC 8649: Hash Of Root Key Certificate Extension
Informational- R. Housley
- August 2019
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document specifies the Hash Of Root Key certificate extension. This certificate extension is carried in the self-signed certificate for a trust anchor, which is often called a Root Certification Authority (CA) certificate. This certificate extension unambiguously identifies the next public key that will be used at some point in the future as the next Root CA certificate, eventually replacing the current one.
Abstract
This document specifies the Hash Of Root Key certificate extension. This certificate extension is carried in the self-signed certificate for a trust anchor, which is often called a Root Certification Authority (CA) certificate. This certificate extension unambiguously identifies the next public key that will be used at some point in the future as the next Root CA certificate, eventually replacing the current one.
RFC 8630: Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Trust Anchor Locator
Proposed Standard- G. Huston
- S. Weiler
- G. Michaelson
- S. Kent
- T. Bruijnzeels
- August 2019
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
This document defines a Trust Anchor Locator (TAL) for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). The TAL allows Relying Parties in the RPKI to download the current Trust Anchor (TA) Certification Authority (CA) certificate from one or more locations and verify that the key of this self-signed certificate matches the key on the TAL. Thus, Relying Parties can be configured with TA keys but can allow these TAs to change the content of their CA certificate. In particular, it allows TAs to change the set of IP Address Delegations and/or Autonomous System Identifier Delegations included in the extension(s) (RFC 3779) of their certificate.
This document obsoletes the previous definition of the TAL as provided in RFC 7730 by adding support for Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) (RFC 3986) that use HTTP over TLS (HTTPS) (RFC 7230) as the scheme.
Abstract
This document defines a Trust Anchor Locator (TAL) for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). The TAL allows Relying Parties in the RPKI to download the current Trust Anchor (TA) Certification Authority (CA) certificate from one or more locations and verify that the key of this self-signed certificate matches the key on the TAL. Thus, Relying Parties can be configured with TA keys but can allow these TAs to change the content of their CA certificate. In particular, it allows TAs to change the set of IP Address Delegations and/or Autonomous System Identifier Delegations included in the extension(s) (RFC 3779) of their certificate.
This document obsoletes the previous definition of the TAL as provided in RFC 7730 by adding support for Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) (RFC 3986) that use HTTP over TLS (HTTPS) (RFC 7230) as the scheme.
RFC 8550: Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 4.0 Certificate Handling
Proposed Standard- J. Schaad
- B. Ramsdell
- S. Turner
- April 2019
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document specifies conventions for X.509 certificate usage by Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) v4.0 agents. S/MIME provides a method to send and receive secure MIME messages, and certificates are an integral part of S/MIME agent processing. S/MIME agents validate certificates as described in RFC 5280 ("Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile"). S/MIME agents must meet the certificate-processing requirements in this document as well as those in RFC 5280. This document obsoletes RFC 5750.
Abstract
This document specifies conventions for X.509 certificate usage by Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) v4.0 agents. S/MIME provides a method to send and receive secure MIME messages, and certificates are an integral part of S/MIME agent processing. S/MIME agents validate certificates as described in RFC 5280 ("Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile"). S/MIME agents must meet the certificate-processing requirements in this document as well as those in RFC 5280. This document obsoletes RFC 5750.
RFC 8551: Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 4.0 Message Specification
Proposed Standard- J. Schaad
- B. Ramsdell
- S. Turner
- April 2019
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This document defines Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) version 4.0. S/MIME provides a consistent way to send and receive secure MIME data. Digital signatures provide authentication, message integrity, and non-repudiation with proof of origin. Encryption provides data confidentiality. Compression can be used to reduce data size. This document obsoletes RFC 5751.
Abstract
This document defines Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) version 4.0. S/MIME provides a consistent way to send and receive secure MIME data. Digital signatures provide authentication, message integrity, and non-repudiation with proof of origin. Encryption provides data confidentiality. Compression can be used to reduce data size. This document obsoletes RFC 5751.
RFC 8488: RIPE NCC's Implementation of Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Certificate Tree Validation
Informational- O. Muravskiy
- T. Bruijnzeels
- December 2018
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
This document describes an approach to validating the content of the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) certificate tree, as it is implemented in the RIPE NCC RPKI Validator. This approach is independent of a particular object retrieval mechanism, which allows it to be used with repositories available over the rsync protocol, the RPKI Repository Delta Protocol (RRDP), and repositories that use a mix of both.
Abstract
This document describes an approach to validating the content of the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) certificate tree, as it is implemented in the RIPE NCC RPKI Validator. This approach is independent of a particular object retrieval mechanism, which allows it to be used with repositories available over the rsync protocol, the RPKI Repository Delta Protocol (RRDP), and repositories that use a mix of both.
RFC 8481: Clarifications to BGP Origin Validation Based on Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)
Proposed Standard- R. Bush
- September 2018
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
Deployment of BGP origin validation based on Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) is hampered by, among other things, vendor misimplementations in two critical areas: which routes are validated and whether policy is applied when not specified by configuration. This document is meant to clarify possible misunderstandings causing those misimplementations; it thus updates RFC 6811 by clarifying that all prefixes should have their validation state set and that policy must not be applied without operator configuration.
Abstract
Deployment of BGP origin validation based on Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) is hampered by, among other things, vendor misimplementations in two critical areas: which routes are validated and whether policy is applied when not specified by configuration. This document is meant to clarify possible misunderstandings causing those misimplementations; it thus updates RFC 6811 by clarifying that all prefixes should have their validation state set and that policy must not be applied without operator configuration.
RFC 8399: Internationalization Updates to RFC 5280
Proposed Standard- R. Housley
- May 2018
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
The updates to RFC 5280 described in this document provide alignment with the 2008 specification for Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and add support for internationalized email addresses in X.509 certificates.
- Obsoleted by RFC 9549
Abstract
The updates to RFC 5280 described in this document provide alignment with the 2008 specification for Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and add support for internationalized email addresses in X.509 certificates.
RFC 8360: Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Validation Reconsidered
Proposed Standard- G. Huston
- G. Michaelson
- C. Martinez
- T. Bruijnzeels
- A. Newton
- D. Shaw
- April 2018
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document specifies an alternative to the certificate validation procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operational fragility in the management of certificates in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), while retaining essential security features.
The procedure specified in RFC 6487 requires that Resource Certificates are rejected entirely if they are found to overclaim any resources not contained on the issuing certificate, whereas the validation process defined here allows an issuing Certification Authority (CA) to chose to communicate that such Resource Certificates should be accepted for the intersection of their resources and the issuing certificate.
It should be noted that the validation process defined here considers validation under a single trust anchor (TA) only. In particular, concerns regarding overclaims where multiple configured TAs claim overlapping resources are considered out of scope for this document.
This choice is signaled by a set of alternative Object Identifiers (OIDs) per "X.509 Extensions for IP Addresses and AS Identifiers" (RFC 3779) and "Certificate Policy (CP) for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)" (RFC 6484). It should be noted that in case these OIDs are not used for any certificate under a trust anchor, the validation procedure defined here has the same outcome as the procedure defined in RFC 6487.
Furthermore, this document provides an alternative to Route Origin Authorization (ROA) (RFC 6482) and BGPsec Router Certificate (BGPsec PKI Profiles -- publication requested) validation.
Abstract
This document specifies an alternative to the certificate validation procedure specified in RFC 6487 that reduces aspects of operational fragility in the management of certificates in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), while retaining essential security features.
The procedure specified in RFC 6487 requires that Resource Certificates are rejected entirely if they are found to overclaim any resources not contained on the issuing certificate, whereas the validation process defined here allows an issuing Certification Authority (CA) to chose to communicate that such Resource Certificates should be accepted for the intersection of their resources and the issuing certificate.
It should be noted that the validation process defined here considers validation under a single trust anchor (TA) only. In particular, concerns regarding overclaims where multiple configured TAs claim overlapping resources are considered out of scope for this document.
This choice is signaled by a set of alternative Object Identifiers (OIDs) per "X.509 Extensions for IP Addresses and AS Identifiers" (RFC 3779) and "Certificate Policy (CP) for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)" (RFC 6484). It should be noted that in case these OIDs are not used for any certificate under a trust anchor, the validation procedure defined here has the same outcome as the procedure defined in RFC 6487.
Furthermore, this document provides an alternative to Route Origin Authorization (ROA) (RFC 6482) and BGPsec Router Certificate (BGPsec PKI Profiles -- publication requested) validation.
RFC 8210: The Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) to Router Protocol, Version 1
Proposed Standard- R. Bush
- R. Austein
- September 2017
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
In order to verifiably validate the origin Autonomous Systems and Autonomous System Paths of BGP announcements, routers need a simple but reliable mechanism to receive Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RFC 6480) prefix origin data and router keys from a trusted cache. This document describes a protocol to deliver them.
This document describes version 1 of the RPKI-Router protocol. RFC 6810 describes version 0. This document updates RFC 6810.
Abstract
In order to verifiably validate the origin Autonomous Systems and Autonomous System Paths of BGP announcements, routers need a simple but reliable mechanism to receive Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RFC 6480) prefix origin data and router keys from a trusted cache. This document describes a protocol to deliver them.
This document describes version 1 of the RPKI-Router protocol. RFC 6810 describes version 0. This document updates RFC 6810.
RFC 8211: Adverse Actions by a Certification Authority (CA) or Repository Manager in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)
Informational- S. Kent
- D. Ma
- September 2017
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document analyzes actions by or against a Certification Authority (CA) or an independent repository manager in the RPKI that can adversely affect the Internet Number Resources (INRs) associated with that CA or its subordinate CAs. The analysis is done from the perspective of an affected INR holder. The analysis is based on examination of the data items in the RPKI repository, as controlled by a CA (or an independent repository manager) and fetched by Relying Parties (RPs). The analysis does not purport to be comprehensive; it does represent an orderly way to analyze a number of ways that errors by or attacks against a CA or repository manager can affect the RPKI and routing decisions based on RPKI data.
Abstract
This document analyzes actions by or against a Certification Authority (CA) or an independent repository manager in the RPKI that can adversely affect the Internet Number Resources (INRs) associated with that CA or its subordinate CAs. The analysis is done from the perspective of an affected INR holder. The analysis is based on examination of the data items in the RPKI repository, as controlled by a CA (or an independent repository manager) and fetched by Relying Parties (RPs). The analysis does not purport to be comprehensive; it does represent an orderly way to analyze a number of ways that errors by or attacks against a CA or repository manager can affect the RPKI and routing decisions based on RPKI data.
RFC 8181: A Publication Protocol for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)
Proposed Standard- S. Weiler
- A. Sonalker
- R. Austein
- July 2017
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document defines a protocol for publishing Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) objects. Even though the RPKI will have many participants issuing certificates and creating other objects, it is operationally useful to consolidate the publication of those objects. Even in cases where a certificate issuer runs its own publication repository, it can be useful to run the certificate engine itself on a different machine from the publication repository. This document defines a protocol which addresses these needs.
Abstract
This document defines a protocol for publishing Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) objects. Even though the RPKI will have many participants issuing certificates and creating other objects, it is operationally useful to consolidate the publication of those objects. Even in cases where a certificate issuer runs its own publication repository, it can be useful to run the certificate engine itself on a different machine from the publication repository. This document defines a protocol which addresses these needs.
RFC 8183: An Out-of-Band Setup Protocol for Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Production Services
Proposed Standard- R. Austein
- July 2017
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This note describes a simple out-of-band protocol to ease setup of the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) provisioning and publication protocols between two parties. The protocol is encoded in a small number of XML messages, which can be passed back and forth by any mutually agreeable means which provides acceptable data integrity and authentication.
This setup protocol is not part of the provisioning or publication protocol; rather, it is intended to simplify configuration of these protocols by setting up relationships and exchanging keying material used to authenticate those relationships.
Abstract
This note describes a simple out-of-band protocol to ease setup of the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) provisioning and publication protocols between two parties. The protocol is encoded in a small number of XML messages, which can be passed back and forth by any mutually agreeable means which provides acceptable data integrity and authentication.
This setup protocol is not part of the provisioning or publication protocol; rather, it is intended to simplify configuration of these protocols by setting up relationships and exchanging keying material used to authenticate those relationships.
RFC 7935: The Profile for Algorithms and Key Sizes for Use in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure
Proposed Standard- G. Huston
- G. Michaelson
- August 2016
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document specifies the algorithms, algorithms' parameters, asymmetric key formats, asymmetric key size, and signature format for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) subscribers that generate digital signatures on certificates, Certificate Revocation Lists (CRLs), Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) signed objects and certification requests as well as for the relying parties (RPs) that verify these digital signatures.
Abstract
This document specifies the algorithms, algorithms' parameters, asymmetric key formats, asymmetric key size, and signature format for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) subscribers that generate digital signatures on certificates, Certificate Revocation Lists (CRLs), Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) signed objects and certification requests as well as for the relying parties (RPs) that verify these digital signatures.
RFC 7909: Securing Routing Policy Specification Language (RPSL) Objects with Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Signatures
Proposed Standard- R. Kisteleki
- B. Haberman
- June 2016
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document describes a method that allows parties to electronically sign Routing Policy Specification Language objects and validate such electronic signatures. This allows relying parties to detect accidental or malicious modifications of such objects. It also allows parties who run Internet Routing Registries or similar databases, but do not yet have authentication (based on Routing Policy System Security) of the maintainers of certain objects, to verify that the additions or modifications of such database objects are done by the legitimate holder(s) of the Internet resources mentioned in those objects. This document updates RFCs 2622 and 4012 to add the signature attribute to supported RPSL objects.
Abstract
This document describes a method that allows parties to electronically sign Routing Policy Specification Language objects and validate such electronic signatures. This allows relying parties to detect accidental or malicious modifications of such objects. It also allows parties who run Internet Routing Registries or similar databases, but do not yet have authentication (based on Routing Policy System Security) of the maintainers of certain objects, to verify that the additions or modifications of such database objects are done by the legitimate holder(s) of the Internet resources mentioned in those objects. This document updates RFCs 2622 and 4012 to add the signature attribute to supported RPSL objects.
RFC 7730: Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Trust Anchor Locator
Proposed Standard- G. Huston
- S. Weiler
- G. Michaelson
- S. Kent
- January 2016
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document defines a Trust Anchor Locator (TAL) for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). This document obsoletes RFC 6490 by adding support for multiple URIs in a TAL.
- Obsoleted by RFC 8630
Abstract
This document defines a Trust Anchor Locator (TAL) for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). This document obsoletes RFC 6490 by adding support for multiple URIs in a TAL.
RFC 7382: BCP 173: Template for a Certification Practice Statement (CPS) for the Resource PKI (RPKI)
Best Current Practice- S. Kent
- D. Kong
- K. Seo
- April 2015
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document contains a template to be used for creating a Certification Practice Statement (CPS) for an organization that is part of the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), e.g., a resource allocation registry or an ISP.
Abstract
This document contains a template to be used for creating a Certification Practice Statement (CPS) for an organization that is part of the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), e.g., a resource allocation registry or an ISP.
RFC 7318: Policy Qualifiers in Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Certificates
Proposed Standard- A. Newton
- G. Huston
- July 2014
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document updates RFC 6487 by clarifying the inclusion of policy qualifiers in the certificate policies extension of Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) resource certificates.
Abstract
This document updates RFC 6487 by clarifying the inclusion of policy qualifiers in the certificate policies extension of Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) resource certificates.
RFC 7128: Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Router Implementation Report
Informational- R. Bush
- R. Austein
- K. Patel
- H. Gredler
- M. Waehlisch
- February 2014
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document is an implementation report for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Router protocol as defined in RFC 6810. The authors did not verify the accuracy of the information provided by respondents. The respondents are experts with the implementations they reported on, and their responses are considered authoritative for the implementations for which their responses represent. The respondents were asked to only use the "YES" answer if the feature had at least been tested in the lab.
Abstract
This document is an implementation report for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Router protocol as defined in RFC 6810. The authors did not verify the accuracy of the information provided by respondents. The respondents are experts with the implementations they reported on, and their responses are considered authoritative for the implementations for which their responses represent. The respondents were asked to only use the "YES" answer if the feature had at least been tested in the lab.
RFC 7115: BCP 185: Origin Validation Operation Based on the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)
Best Current Practice- R. Bush
- January 2014
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
Deployment of BGP origin validation that is based on the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) has many operational considerations. This document attempts to collect and present those that are most critical. It is expected to evolve as RPKI-based origin validation continues to be deployed and the dynamics are better understood.
Abstract
Deployment of BGP origin validation that is based on the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) has many operational considerations. This document attempts to collect and present those that are most critical. It is expected to evolve as RPKI-based origin validation continues to be deployed and the dynamics are better understood.
RFC 6945: Definitions of Managed Objects for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) to Router Protocol
Proposed Standard- R. Bush
- B. Wijnen
- K. Patel
- M. Baer
- May 2013
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes objects used for monitoring the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) to Router Protocol.
Abstract
This document defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes objects used for monitoring the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) to Router Protocol.
RFC 6916: BCP 182: Algorithm Agility Procedure for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)
Best Current Practice- R. Gagliano
- S. Kent
- S. Turner
- April 2013
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document specifies the process that Certification Authorities (CAs) and Relying Parties (RPs) participating in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) will need to follow to transition to a new (and probably cryptographically stronger) algorithm set. The process is expected to be completed over a timescale of several years. Consequently, no emergency transition is specified. The transition procedure defined in this document supports only a top-down migration (parent migrates before children).
Abstract
This document specifies the process that Certification Authorities (CAs) and Relying Parties (RPs) participating in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) will need to follow to transition to a new (and probably cryptographically stronger) algorithm set. The process is expected to be completed over a timescale of several years. Consequently, no emergency transition is specified. The transition procedure defined in this document supports only a top-down migration (parent migrates before children).
RFC 6907: Use Cases and Interpretations of Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Objects for Issuers and Relying Parties
Informational- T. Manderson
- K. Sriram
- R. White
- March 2013
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document describes a number of use cases together with directions and interpretations for organizations and relying parties when creating or encountering Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) object scenarios in the public RPKI. All of these items are discussed here in relation to the Internet routing system.
Abstract
This document describes a number of use cases together with directions and interpretations for organizations and relying parties when creating or encountering Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) object scenarios in the public RPKI. All of these items are discussed here in relation to the Internet routing system.
RFC 6810: The Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) to Router Protocol
Proposed Standard- R. Bush
- R. Austein
- January 2013
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
In order to verifiably validate the origin Autonomous Systems of BGP announcements, routers need a simple but reliable mechanism to receive Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RFC 6480) prefix origin data from a trusted cache. This document describes a protocol to deliver validated prefix origin data to routers. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
In order to verifiably validate the origin Autonomous Systems of BGP announcements, routers need a simple but reliable mechanism to receive Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RFC 6480) prefix origin data from a trusted cache. This document describes a protocol to deliver validated prefix origin data to routers. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6698: The DNS-Based Authentication of Named Entities (DANE) Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol: TLSA
Proposed Standard- P. Hoffman
- J. Schlyter
- August 2012
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
Encrypted communication on the Internet often uses Transport Layer Security (TLS), which depends on third parties to certify the keys used. This document improves on that situation by enabling the administrators of domain names to specify the keys used in that domain's TLS servers. This requires matching improvements in TLS client software, but no change in TLS server software. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
Encrypted communication on the Internet often uses Transport Layer Security (TLS), which depends on third parties to certify the keys used. This document improves on that situation by enabling the administrators of domain names to specify the keys used in that domain's TLS servers. This requires matching improvements in TLS client software, but no change in TLS server software. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6481: A Profile for Resource Certificate Repository Structure
Proposed Standard- G. Huston
- R. Loomans
- G. Michaelson
- February 2012
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document defines a profile for the structure of the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) distributed repository. Each individual repository publication point is a directory that contains files that correspond to X.509/PKIX Resource Certificates, Certificate Revocation Lists and signed objects. This profile defines the object (file) naming scheme, the contents of repository publication points (directories), and a suggested internal structure of a local repository cache that is intended to facilitate synchronization across a distributed collection of repository publication points and to facilitate certification path construction. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a profile for the structure of the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) distributed repository. Each individual repository publication point is a directory that contains files that correspond to X.509/PKIX Resource Certificates, Certificate Revocation Lists and signed objects. This profile defines the object (file) naming scheme, the contents of repository publication points (directories), and a suggested internal structure of a local repository cache that is intended to facilitate synchronization across a distributed collection of repository publication points and to facilitate certification path construction. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6483: Validation of Route Origination Using the Resource Certificate Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) and Route Origin Authorizations (ROAs)
Informational- G. Huston
- G. Michaelson
- February 2012
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document defines the semantics of a Route Origin Authorization (ROA) in terms of the context of an application of the Resource Public Key Infrastructure to validate the origination of routes advertised in the Border Gateway Protocol. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
This document defines the semantics of a Route Origin Authorization (ROA) in terms of the context of an application of the Resource Public Key Infrastructure to validate the origination of routes advertised in the Border Gateway Protocol. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 6485: The Profile for Algorithms and Key Sizes for Use in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)
Proposed Standard- G. Huston
- February 2012
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document specifies the algorithms, algorithms' parameters, asymmetric key formats, asymmetric key size, and signature format for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) subscribers that generate digital signatures on certificates, Certificate Revocation Lists, and signed objects as well as for the relying parties (RPs) that verify these digital signatures. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
- Obsoleted by RFC 7935
Abstract
This document specifies the algorithms, algorithms' parameters, asymmetric key formats, asymmetric key size, and signature format for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) subscribers that generate digital signatures on certificates, Certificate Revocation Lists, and signed objects as well as for the relying parties (RPs) that verify these digital signatures. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6486: Manifests for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)
Proposed Standard- R. Austein
- G. Huston
- S. Kent
- M. Lepinski
- February 2012
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document defines a "manifest" for use in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). A manifest is a signed object (file) that contains a listing of all the signed objects (files) in the repository publication point (directory) associated with an authority responsible for publishing in the repository. For each certificate, Certificate Revocation List (CRL), or other type of signed objects issued by the authority that are published at this repository publication point, the manifest contains both the name of the file containing the object and a hash of the file content. Manifests are intended to enable a relying party (RP) to detect certain forms of attacks against a repository. Specifically, if an RP checks a manifest's contents against the signed objects retrieved from a repository publication point, then the RP can detect "stale" (valid) data and deletion of signed objects. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
- Obsoleted by RFC 9286
Abstract
This document defines a "manifest" for use in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). A manifest is a signed object (file) that contains a listing of all the signed objects (files) in the repository publication point (directory) associated with an authority responsible for publishing in the repository. For each certificate, Certificate Revocation List (CRL), or other type of signed objects issued by the authority that are published at this repository publication point, the manifest contains both the name of the file containing the object and a hash of the file content. Manifests are intended to enable a relying party (RP) to detect certain forms of attacks against a repository. Specifically, if an RP checks a manifest's contents against the signed objects retrieved from a repository publication point, then the RP can detect "stale" (valid) data and deletion of signed objects. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6488: Signed Object Template for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)
Proposed Standard- M. Lepinski
- A. Chi
- S. Kent
- February 2012
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document defines a generic profile for signed objects used in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). These RPKI signed objects make use of Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) as a standard encapsulation format. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a generic profile for signed objects used in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). These RPKI signed objects make use of Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) as a standard encapsulation format. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6489: BCP 174: Certification Authority (CA) Key Rollover in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)
Best Current Practice- G. Huston
- G. Michaelson
- S. Kent
- February 2012
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document describes how a Certification Authority (CA) in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) performs a planned rollover of its key pair. This document also notes the implications of this key rollover procedure for relying parties (RPs). In general, RPs are expected to maintain a local cache of the objects that have been published in the RPKI repository, and thus the way in which a CA performs key rollover impacts RPs. This memo documents an Internet Best Current Practice.
Abstract
This document describes how a Certification Authority (CA) in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) performs a planned rollover of its key pair. This document also notes the implications of this key rollover procedure for relying parties (RPs). In general, RPs are expected to maintain a local cache of the objects that have been published in the RPKI repository, and thus the way in which a CA performs key rollover impacts RPs. This memo documents an Internet Best Current Practice.
RFC 6490: Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Trust Anchor Locator
Proposed Standard- G. Huston
- S. Weiler
- G. Michaelson
- S. Kent
- February 2012
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document defines a Trust Anchor Locator (TAL) for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
- Obsoleted by RFC 7730
Abstract
This document defines a Trust Anchor Locator (TAL) for the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6491: Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Objects Issued by IANA
Proposed Standard- T. Manderson
- L. Vegoda
- S. Kent
- February 2012
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document provides specific direction to IANA as to the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) objects it should issue. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document provides specific direction to IANA as to the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) objects it should issue. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6493: The Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Ghostbusters Record
Historic- R. Bush
- February 2012
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
In the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), resource certificates completely obscure names or any other information that might be useful for contacting responsible parties to deal with issues of certificate expiration, maintenance, roll-overs, compromises, etc. This document describes the RPKI Ghostbusters Record containing human contact information that may be verified (indirectly) by a Certification Authority (CA) certificate. The data in the record are those of a severely profiled vCard. [STANDARDS- TRACK]
Abstract
In the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), resource certificates completely obscure names or any other information that might be useful for contacting responsible parties to deal with issues of certificate expiration, maintenance, roll-overs, compromises, etc. This document describes the RPKI Ghostbusters Record containing human contact information that may be verified (indirectly) by a Certification Authority (CA) certificate. The data in the record are those of a severely profiled vCard. [STANDARDS- TRACK]
RFC 6010: Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) Content Constraints Extension
Proposed Standard- R. Housley
- S. Ashmore
- C. Wallace
- September 2010
- IETF publication
Abstract
This document specifies the syntax and semantics for the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) content constraints extension. This extension is used to determine whether a public key is appropriate to use in the processing of a protected content. In particular, the CMS content constraints extension is one part of the authorization decision; it is used when validating a digital signature on a CMS SignedData content or validating a message authentication code (MAC) on a CMS AuthenticatedData content or CMS AuthEnvelopedData content. The signed or authenticated content type is identified by an ASN.1 object identifier, and this extension indicates the content types that the public key is authorized to validate. If the authorization check is successful, the CMS content constraints extension also provides default values for absent attributes. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document specifies the syntax and semantics for the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) content constraints extension. This extension is used to determine whether a public key is appropriate to use in the processing of a protected content. In particular, the CMS content constraints extension is one part of the authorization decision; it is used when validating a digital signature on a CMS SignedData content or validating a message authentication code (MAC) on a CMS AuthenticatedData content or CMS AuthEnvelopedData content. The signed or authenticated content type is identified by an ASN.1 object identifier, and this extension indicates the content types that the public key is authorized to validate. If the authorization check is successful, the CMS content constraints extension also provides default values for absent attributes. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5276: Using the Server-Based Certificate Validation Protocol (SCVP) to Convey Long-Term Evidence Records
Proposed Standard- C. Wallace
- August 2008
- IETF publication
- Applications Area
Abstract
The Server-based Certificate Validation Protocol (SCVP) defines an extensible means of delegating the development and validation of certification paths to a server. It can be used to support the development and validation of certification paths well after the expiration of the certificates in the path by specifying a time of interest in the past. The Evidence Record Syntax (ERS) defines structures, called evidence records, to support the non-repudiation of the existence of data. Evidence records can be used to preserve materials that comprise a certification path such that trust in the certificates can be established after the expiration of the certificates in the path and after the cryptographic algorithms used to sign the certificates in the path are no longer secure. This document describes usage of the SCVP WantBack feature to convey evidence records, enabling SCVP responders to provide preservation evidence for certificates and certificate revocation lists (CRLs). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Server-based Certificate Validation Protocol (SCVP) defines an extensible means of delegating the development and validation of certification paths to a server. It can be used to support the development and validation of certification paths well after the expiration of the certificates in the path by specifying a time of interest in the past. The Evidence Record Syntax (ERS) defines structures, called evidence records, to support the non-repudiation of the existence of data. Evidence records can be used to preserve materials that comprise a certification path such that trust in the certificates can be established after the expiration of the certificates in the path and after the cryptographic algorithms used to sign the certificates in the path are no longer secure. This document describes usage of the SCVP WantBack feature to convey evidence records, enabling SCVP responders to provide preservation evidence for certificates and certificate revocation lists (CRLs). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5217: Memorandum for Multi-Domain Public Key Infrastructure Interoperability
Informational- M. Shimaoka
- N. Hastings
- R. Nielsen
- July 2008
- IETF publication
Abstract
The objective of this document is to establish a terminology framework and to suggest the operational requirements of Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) domain for interoperability of multi-domain Public Key Infrastructure, where each PKI domain is operated under a distinct policy. This document describes the relationships between Certification Authorities (CAs), provides the definition and requirements for PKI domains, and discusses typical models of multi-domain PKI. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
The objective of this document is to establish a terminology framework and to suggest the operational requirements of Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) domain for interoperability of multi-domain Public Key Infrastructure, where each PKI domain is operated under a distinct policy. This document describes the relationships between Certification Authorities (CAs), provides the definition and requirements for PKI domains, and discusses typical models of multi-domain PKI. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4809: Requirements for an IPsec Certificate Management Profile
Informational- C. Bonatti
- S. Turner
- G. Lebovitz
- February 2007
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This informational document describes and identifies the requirements for transactions to handle Public Key Certificate (PKC) lifecycle transactions between Internet Protocol Security (IPsec) Virtual Private Network (VPN) Systems using Internet Key Exchange (IKE) (versions 1 and 2) and Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) Systems. These requirements are designed to meet the needs of enterprise-scale IPsec VPN deployments. It is intended that a standards track profile of a management protocol will be created to address many of these requirements. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This informational document describes and identifies the requirements for transactions to handle Public Key Certificate (PKC) lifecycle transactions between Internet Protocol Security (IPsec) Virtual Private Network (VPN) Systems using Internet Key Exchange (IKE) (versions 1 and 2) and Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) Systems. These requirements are designed to meet the needs of enterprise-scale IPsec VPN deployments. It is intended that a standards track profile of a management protocol will be created to address many of these requirements. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Subscribe to PKI
Get notified when:
- RFC changes to status, obsoleted by, updates, updated by, or subseries.
- New RFC added to this subject or below
- The subject was merged into another.