1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
|
<pre>Network Working Group B. Aboba
Request for Comments: 2486 Microsoft
Category: Standards Track M. Beadles
WorldCom Advanced Networks
January 1999
<span class="h1">The Network Access Identifier</span>
Status of this Memo
This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-1" href="#section-1">1</a>. Abstract</span>
In order to enhance the interoperability of roaming and tunneling
services, it is desirable to have a standardized method for
identifying users. This document proposes syntax for the Network
Access Identifier (NAI), the userID submitted by the client during
PPP authentication. It is expected that this will be of interest for
support of roaming as well as tunneling. "Roaming capability" may be
loosely defined as the ability to use any one of multiple Internet
service providers (ISPs), while maintaining a formal, customer-vendor
relationship with only one. Examples of where roaming capabilities
might be required include ISP "confederations" and ISP-provided
corporate network access support.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-2" href="#section-2">2</a>. Introduction</span>
Considerable interest has arisen recently in a set of features that
fit within the general category of "roaming capability" for dialup
Internet users. Interested parties have included:
Regional Internet Service Providers (ISPs) operating within a
particular state or province, looking to combine their efforts
with those of other regional providers to offer dialup service
over a wider area.
<span class="grey">Aboba & Beadles Standards Track [Page 1]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-2" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc2486">RFC 2486</a> The Network Access Identifier January 1999</span>
National ISPs wishing to combine their operations with those of
one or more ISPs in another nation to offer more comprehensive
dialup service in a group of countries or on a continent.
Businesses desiring to offer their employees a comprehensive
package of dialup services on a global basis. Those services
may include Internet access as well as secure access to
corporate intranets via a Virtual Private Network (VPN), enabled
by tunneling protocols such as PPTP, L2F, L2TP, and IPSEC tunnel
mode.
In order to enhance the interoperability of roaming and tunneling
services, it is desirable to have a standardized method for
identifying users. This document proposes syntax for the Network
Access Identifier (NAI). Examples of implementations that use the
NAI, and descriptions of its semantics, can be found in [<a href="#ref-1" title=""Review of Roaming Implementations"">1</a>].
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-2.1" href="#section-2.1">2.1</a>. Terminology</span>
This document frequently uses the following terms:
Network Access Identifier
The Network Access Identifier (NAI) is the userID submitted
by the client during PPP authentication. In roaming, the
purpose of the NAI is to identify the user as well as to
assist in the routing of the authentication request.
Please note that the NAI may not necessarily be the same as
the user's e-mail address or the userID submitted in an
application layer authentication.
Network Access Server
The Network Access Server (NAS) is the device that clients
dial in order to get access to the network. In PPTP
terminology this is referred to as the PPTP Access
Concentrator (PAC), and in L2TP terminology, it is referred
to as the L2TP Access Concentrator (LAC).
Roaming Capability
Roaming capability can be loosely defined as the ability to
use any one of multiple Internet service providers (ISPs),
while maintaining a formal, customer-vendor relationship
with only one. Examples of cases where roaming capability
might be required include ISP "confederations" and ISP-
provided corporate network access support.
<span class="grey">Aboba & Beadles Standards Track [Page 2]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-3" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc2486">RFC 2486</a> The Network Access Identifier January 1999</span>
Tunneling Service
A tunneling service is any network service enabled by
tunneling protocols such as PPTP, L2F, L2TP, and IPSEC
tunnel mode. One example of a tunneling service is secure
access to corporate intranets via a Virtual Private Network
(VPN).
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-2.2" href="#section-2.2">2.2</a>. Requirements language</span>
In this document, the key words "MAY", "MUST, "MUST NOT", "optional",
"recommended", "SHOULD", and "SHOULD NOT", are to be interpreted as
described in [<a href="#ref-9" title=""Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"">9</a>].
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-2.3" href="#section-2.3">2.3</a>. Purpose</span>
As described in [<a href="#ref-1" title=""Review of Roaming Implementations"">1</a>], there are now a number of services implementing
dialup roaming, and the number of Internet Service Providers involved
in roaming consortia is increasing rapidly.
In order to be able to offer roaming capability, one of the
requirements is to be able to identify the user's home authentication
server. For use in roaming, this function is accomplished via the
Network Access Identifier (NAI) submitted by the user to the NAS in
the initial PPP authentication. It is also expected that NASes will
use the NAI as part of the process of opening a new tunnel, in order
to determine the tunnel endpoint.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-2.4" href="#section-2.4">2.4</a>. Notes for Implementors</span>
As proposed in this document, the Network Access Identifier is of the
form user@realm. Please note that while the user portion of the NAI
conforms to the BNF described in [<a href="#ref-5" title=""Simple Mail Transfer Protocol"">5</a>], the BNF of the realm portion
allows the realm to begin with a digit, which is not permitted by the
BNF described in [<a href="#ref-4" title=""Domain Names - Implementation and Specification"">4</a>]. This change was made to reflect current
practice; although not permitted by the BNF described in [<a href="#ref-4" title=""Domain Names - Implementation and Specification"">4</a>], FQDNs
such as 3com.com are commonly used, and accepted by current software.
Please note that NAS vendors may need to modify their devices so as
to support the NAI as described in this document. Devices handling
NAIs MUST support an NAI length of at least 72 octets.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-3" href="#section-3">3</a>. Formal definition of the NAI</span>
The grammar for the NAI is given below, described in ABNF as
documented in [<a href="#ref-7" title=""Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF"">7</a>]. The grammar for the username is taken from [<a href="#ref-5" title=""Simple Mail Transfer Protocol"">5</a>],
and the grammar for the realm is an updated version of [<a href="#ref-4" title=""Domain Names - Implementation and Specification"">4</a>].
nai = username / ( username "@" realm )
<span class="grey">Aboba & Beadles Standards Track [Page 3]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-4" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc2486">RFC 2486</a> The Network Access Identifier January 1999</span>
username = dot-string
realm = realm "." label
label = let-dig * (ldh-str)
ldh-str = *( Alpha / Digit / "-" ) let-dig
dot-string = string / ( dot-string "." string )
string = char / ( string char )
char = c / ( "\" x )
let-dig = Alpha / Digit
Alpha = %x41-5A / %x61-7A ; A-Z / a-z
Digit = %x30-39 ;0-9
c = < any one of the 128 ASCII characters, but
not any special or SP >
x = %x00-7F
; all 127 ASCII characters, no exception
SP = %x20 ; Space character
special = "<" / ">" / "(" / ")" / "[" / "]" / "\" / "."
/ "," / ";" / ":" / "@" / %x22 / Ctl
Ctl = %x00-1F / %x7F
; the control characters (ASCII codes 0 through 31
; inclusive and 127)
Examples of valid Network Access Identifiers include:
fred@3com.com
fred@foo-9.com
fred_smith@big-co.com
fred=?#$&*+-/^smith@bigco.com
fred@bigco.com
nancy@eng.bigu.edu
eng!nancy@bigu.edu
eng%nancy@bigu.edu
<span class="grey">Aboba & Beadles Standards Track [Page 4]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-5" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc2486">RFC 2486</a> The Network Access Identifier January 1999</span>
Examples of invalid Network Access Identifiers include:
fred@foo
fred@foo_9.com
@howard.edu
fred@bigco.com@smallco.com
eng:nancy@bigu.edu
eng;nancy@bigu.edu
<nancy>@bigu.edu
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-4" href="#section-4">4</a>. References</span>
[<a id="ref-1">1</a>] Aboba, B., Lu J., Alsop J., Ding J. and W. Wang, "Review of
Roaming Implementations", <a href="./rfc2194">RFC 2194</a>, September 1997.
[<a id="ref-2">2</a>] Rigney C., Rubens A., Simpson W. and S. Willens, "Remote
Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", <a href="./rfc2138">RFC 2138</a>, April
1997.
[<a id="ref-3">3</a>] Rigney C., "RADIUS Accounting", <a href="./rfc2139">RFC 2139</a>, April 1997.
[<a id="ref-4">4</a>] Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Implementation and
Specification", STD 13, <a href="./rfc1035">RFC 1035</a>, November 1987.
[<a id="ref-5">5</a>] Postel, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", STD 10, <a href="./rfc821">RFC 821</a>,
August 1982.
[<a id="ref-6">6</a>] Gulbrandsen A. and P. Vixie, "A DNS RR for specifying the
location of services (DNS SRV)", <a href="./rfc2052">RFC 2052</a>, October 1996.
[<a id="ref-7">7</a>] Crocker, D. and P. Overrell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", <a href="./rfc2234">RFC 2234</a>, November 1997.
[<a id="ref-8">8</a>] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "Security Architecture for the
Internet Protocol", <a href="./rfc2401">RFC 2401</a>, November 1998.
[<a id="ref-9">9</a>] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp14">BCP 14</a>, <a href="./rfc2119">RFC 2119</a>, March 1997.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-5" href="#section-5">5</a>. Security Considerations</span>
Since an NAI reveals the home affiliation of a user, it may assist an
attacker in further probing the username space. Typically this
problem is of most concern in protocols which transmit the user name
in clear-text across the Internet, such as in RADIUS, described in
[<a href="#ref-2" title=""Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)"">2</a>] and [<a href="#ref-3" title=""RADIUS Accounting"">3</a>]. In order to prevent snooping of the user name,
protocols may use confidentiality services provided by IPSEC,
described in [<a href="#ref-8" title=""Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol"">8</a>].
<span class="grey">Aboba & Beadles Standards Track [Page 5]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-6" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc2486">RFC 2486</a> The Network Access Identifier January 1999</span>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-6" href="#section-6">6</a>. IANA Considerations</span>
This document defines a new namespace that will need to be
administered, namely the NAI realm namespace. In order to to avoid
creating any new administrative procedures, administration of the NAI
realm namespace will piggyback on the administration of the DNS
namespace.
NAI realm names are required to be unique and the rights to use a
given NAI realm for roaming purposes are obtained coincident with
acquiring the rights to use a particular fully qualified domain name
(FQDN). Those wishing to use an NAI realm name should first acquire
the rights to use the corresponding FQDN. Using an NAI realm without
ownership of the corresponding FQDN creates the possibility of
conflict and therefore is to be discouraged.
Note that the use of an FQDN as the realm name does not imply use of
the DNS for location of the authentication server or for
authentication routing. Since to date roaming has been implemented
on a relatively small scale, existing implementations typically
handle location of authentication servers within a domain and perform
authentication routing based on local knowledge expressed in proxy
configuration files. The implementations described in [<a href="#ref-1" title=""Review of Roaming Implementations"">1</a>] have not
found a need for use of DNS for location of the authentication server
within a domain, although this can be accomplished via use of the DNS
SRV record, described in [<a href="#ref-6" title=""A DNS RR for specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)"">6</a>]. Similarly, existing implementations
have not found a need for dynamic routing protocols, or propagation
of global routing information. Note also that there is no
requirement that the NAI represent a valid email address.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-7" href="#section-7">7</a>. Acknowledgements</span>
Thanks to Glen Zorn of Microsoft for many useful discussions of
this problem space.
<span class="grey">Aboba & Beadles Standards Track [Page 6]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-7" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc2486">RFC 2486</a> The Network Access Identifier January 1999</span>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-8" href="#section-8">8</a>. Authors' Addresses</span>
Bernard Aboba
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052
Phone: 425-936-6605
EMail: bernarda@microsoft.com
Mark A. Beadles
WorldCom Advanced Networks
5000 Britton Rd.
Hilliard, OH 43026
Phone: 614-723-1941
EMail: mbeadles@wcom.net
<span class="grey">Aboba & Beadles Standards Track [Page 7]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-8" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc2486">RFC 2486</a> The Network Access Identifier January 1999</span>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-9" href="#section-9">9</a>. Full Copyright Statement</span>
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Aboba & Beadles Standards Track [Page 8]
</pre>
|
