aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/35.RPKI.CA.Protocols.LeftRight.wiki
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/35.RPKI.CA.Protocols.LeftRight.wiki')
-rw-r--r--doc/35.RPKI.CA.Protocols.LeftRight.wiki473
1 files changed, 473 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/35.RPKI.CA.Protocols.LeftRight.wiki b/doc/35.RPKI.CA.Protocols.LeftRight.wiki
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..0859c463
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/35.RPKI.CA.Protocols.LeftRight.wiki
@@ -0,0 +1,473 @@
+= The Left-Right Protocol =
+
+[[TracNav(doc/RPKI/TOC)]]
+[[PageOutline]]
+
+The left-right protocol is really two separate client/server
+protocols over separate channels between the RPKI engine and the IR
+back end (IRBE). The IRBE is the client for one of the
+subprotocols, the RPKI engine is the client for the other.
+
+== Operations initiated by the IRBE ==
+
+This part of the protcol uses a kind of message-passing. Each object
+that the RPKI engine knows about takes five messages: "create", "set",
+"get", "list", and "destroy". Actions which are not just data
+operations on objects are handled via an SNMP-like mechanism, as if
+they were fields to be set. For example, to generate a keypair one
+"sets" the "generate-keypair" field of a BSC object, even though there
+is no such field in the object itself as stored in SQL. This is a bit
+of a kludge, but the reason for doing it as if these were variables
+being set is to allow composite operations such as creating a BSC,
+populating all of its data fields, and generating a keypair, all as a
+single operation. With this model, that's trivial, otherwise it's at
+least two round trips.
+
+Fields can be set in either "create" or "set" operations, the
+difference just being whether the object already exists. A "get"
+operation returns all visible fields of the object. A "list"
+operation returns a list containing what "get" would have returned on
+each of those objects.
+
+Left-right protocol objects are encoded as signed CMS messages
+containing XML as eContent and using an eContentType OID of {{{id-ct-xml}}}
+(1.2.840.113549.1.9.16.1.28). These CMS messages are in turn passed
+as the data for HTTP POST operations, with an HTTP content type of
+"application/x-rpki" for both the POST data and the response data.
+
+All operations allow an optional "tag" attribute which can be any
+alphanumeric token. The main purpose of the tag attribute is to allow
+batching of multiple requests into a single PDU.
+
+=== self_obj <self/> object ===
+
+A {{{<self/>}}} object represents one virtual RPKI engine. In simple cases
+where the RPKI engine operator operates the engine only on their own
+behalf, there will only be one {{{<self/>}}} object, representing the engine
+operator's organization, but in environments where the engine operator
+hosts other entities, there will be one {{{<self/>}}} object per hosted
+entity (probably including the engine operator's own organization,
+considered as a hosted customer of itself).
+
+Some of the RPKI engine's configured parameters and data are shared by
+all hosted entities, but most are tied to a specific {{{<self/>}}} object.
+Data which are shared by all hosted entities are referred to as
+"per-engine" data, data which are specific to a particular {{{<self/>}}}
+object are "per-self" data.
+
+Since all other RPKI engine objects refer to a {{{<self/>}}} object via a
+"self_handle" value, one must create a {{{<self/>}}} object before one can
+usefully configure any other left-right protocol objects.
+
+Every {{{<self/>}}} object has a self_handle attribute, which must be specified
+for the "create", "set", "get", and "destroy" actions.
+
+Payload data which can be configured in a {{{<self/>}}} object:
+
+use_hsm:: (attribute)
+ Whether to use a Hardware Signing Module. At present this option
+ has no effect, as the implementation does not yet support HSMs.
+
+crl_interval:: (attribute)
+ Positive integer representing the planned lifetime of an RPKI CRL
+ for this {{{<self/>}}}, measured in seconds.
+
+regen_margin:: (attribute)
+ Positive integer representing how long before expiration of an
+ RPKI certificiate a new one should be generated, measured in
+ seconds. At present this only affects the one-off EE
+ certificates associated with ROAs. This parameter also controls
+ how long before the nextUpdate time of CRL or manifest the CRL
+ or manifest should be updated.
+
+bpki_cert:: (element)
+ BPKI CA certificate for this {{{<self/>}}}. This is used as part of the
+ certificate chain when validating incoming TLS and CMS messages,
+ and should be the issuer of cross-certification BPKI certificates
+ used in {{{<repository/>}}}, {{{<parent/>}}}, and {{{<child/>}}} objects. If the
+ bpki_glue certificate is in use (below), the bpki_cert certificate
+ should be issued by the bpki_glue certificate; otherwise, the
+ bpki_cert certificate should be issued by the per-engine bpki_ta
+ certificate.
+
+bpki_glue:: (element)
+ Another BPKI CA certificate for this {{{<self/>}}}, usually not needed.
+ Certain pathological cross-certification cases require a
+ two-certificate chain due to issuer name conflicts. If used, the
+ bpki_glue certificate should be the issuer of the bpki_cert
+ certificate and should be issued by the per-engine bpki_ta
+ certificate; if not needed, the bpki_glue certificate should be
+ left unset.
+
+Control attributes that can be set to "yes" to force actions:
+
+rekey::
+ Start a key rollover for every RPKI CA associated with every
+ {{{<parent/>}}} object associated with this {{{<self/>}}} object. This is the
+ first phase of a key rollover operation.
+
+revoke::
+ Revoke any remaining certificates for any expired key associated
+ with any RPKI CA for any {{{<parent/>}}} object associated with this
+ {{{<self/>}}} object. This is the second (cleanup) phase for a key
+ rollover operation; it's separate from the first phase to leave
+ time for new RPKI certificates to propegate and be installed.
+
+reissue::
+ Not implemented, may be removed from protocol. Original theory
+ was that this operation would force reissuance of any object with
+ a changed key, but as that happens automatically as part of the
+ key rollover mechanism this operation seems unnecessary.
+
+run_now::
+ Force immediate processing for all tasks associated with this
+ {{{<self/>}}} object that would ordinarily be performed under cron. Not
+ currently implemented.
+
+publish_world_now::
+ Force (re)publication of every publishable object for this {{{<self/>}}}
+ object. Not currently implemented. Intended to aid in recovery
+ if RPKI engine and publication engine somehow get out of sync.
+
+
+=== <bsc/> object ===
+
+The {{{<bsc/>}}} ("business signing context") object represents all the BPKI
+data needed to sign outgoing CMS messages. Various other
+objects include pointers to a {{{<bsc/>}}} object. Whether a particular
+{{{<self/>}}} uses only one {{{<bsc/>}}} or multiple is a configuration decision
+based on external requirements: the RPKI engine code doesn't care, it
+just cares that, for any object representing a relationship for which
+it must sign messages, there be a {{{<bsc/>}}} object that it can use to
+produce that signature.
+
+Every {{{<bsc/>}}} object has a bsc_handle, which must be specified for the
+"create", "get", "set", and "destroy" actions. Every {{{<bsc/>}}} also has a self_handle
+attribute which indicates the {{{<self/>}}} object with which this {{{<bsc/>}}}
+object is associated.
+
+Payload data which can be configured in a {{{<isc/>}}} object:
+
+signing_cert:: (element)
+ BPKI certificate to use when generating a signature.
+
+signing_cert_crl:: (element)
+ CRL which would list signing_cert if it had been revoked.
+
+Control attributes that can be set to "yes" to force actions:
+
+generate_keypair::
+ Generate a new BPKI keypair and return a {{{PKCS #10}}} certificate
+ request. The resulting certificate, once issued, should be
+ configured as this {{{<bsc/>}}} object's signing_cert.
+
+Additional attributes which may be specified when specifying
+"generate_keypair":
+
+key_type::
+ Type of BPKI keypair to generate. "rsa" is both the default and,
+ at the moment, the only allowed value.
+
+hash_alg::
+ Cryptographic hash algorithm to use with this keypair. "sha256"
+ is both the default and, at the moment, the only allowed value.
+
+key_length::
+ Length in bits of the keypair to be generated. "2048" is both the
+ default and, at the moment, the only allowed value.
+
+Replies to "create" and "set" actions that specify "generate-keypair"
+include a <bsc_pkcs10/> element, as do replies to "get" and "list"
+actions for a {{{<bsc/>}}} object for which a "generate-keypair" command has
+been issued. The RPKI engine stores the {{{PKCS #10}}} request, which
+allows the IRBE to reuse the request if and when it needs to reissue
+the corresponding BPKI signing certificate.
+
+=== <parent/> object ===
+
+The {{{<parent/>}}} object represents the RPKI engine's view of a particular
+parent of the current {{{<self/>}}} object in the up-down protocol. Due to
+the way that the resource hierarchy works, a given {{{<self/>}}} may obtain
+resources from multiple parents, but it will always have at least one;
+in the case of IANA or an RIR, the parent RPKI engine may be a trivial
+stub.
+
+Every {{{<parent/>}}} object has a parent_handle, which must be specified for
+the "create", "get", "set", and "destroy" actions. Every {{{<parent/>}}} also has a
+self_handle attribute which indicates the {{{<self/>}}} object with which this
+{{{<parent/>}}} object is associated, a bsc_handle attribute indicating the {{{<bsc/>}}}
+object to be used when signing messages sent to this parent, and a
+repository_handle indicating the {{{<repository/>}}} object to be used when
+publishing issued by the certificate issued by this parent.
+
+Payload data which can be configured in a {{{<parent/>}}} object:
+
+peer_contact_uri:: (attribute)
+ HTTP URI used to contact this parent.
+
+sia_base:: (attribute)
+ The leading portion of an rsync URI that the RPKI engine should
+ use when composing the publication URI for objects issued by the
+ RPKI certificate issued by this parent.
+
+sender_name:: (attribute)
+ Sender name to use in the up-down protocol when talking to this
+ parent. The RPKI engine doesn't really care what this value is,
+ but other implementations of the up-down protocol do care.
+
+recipient_name:: (attribute)
+ Recipient name to use in the up-down protocol when talking to this
+ parent. The RPKI engine doesn't really care what this value is,
+ but other implementations of the up-down protocol do care.
+
+bpki_cms_cert:: (element)
+ BPKI CMS CA certificate for this {{{<parent/>}}}. This is used as part
+ of the certificate chain when validating incoming CMS messages If
+ the bpki_cms_glue certificate is in use (below), the bpki_cms_cert
+ certificate should be issued by the bpki_cms_glue certificate;
+ otherwise, the bpki_cms_cert certificate should be issued by the
+ bpki_cert certificate in the {{{<self/>}}} object.
+
+bpki_cms_glue:: (element)
+ Another BPKI CMS CA certificate for this {{{<parent/>}}}, usually not
+ needed. Certain pathological cross-certification cases require a
+ two-certificate chain due to issuer name conflicts. If used, the
+ bpki_cms_glue certificate should be the issuer of the
+ bpki_cms_cert certificate and should be issued by the bpki_cert
+ certificate in the {{{<self/>}}} object; if not needed, the
+ bpki_cms_glue certificate should be left unset.
+
+Control attributes that can be set to "yes" to force actions:
+
+rekey::
+ This is like the rekey command in the {{{<self/>}}} object, but limited
+ to RPKI CAs under this parent.
+
+reissue::
+ This is like the reissue command in the {{{<self/>}}} object, but limited
+ to RPKI CAs under this parent.
+
+revoke::
+ This is like the revoke command in the {{{<self/>}}} object, but limited
+ to RPKI CAs under this parent.
+
+=== <child/> object ===
+
+The {{{<child/>}}} object represents the RPKI engine's view of particular
+child of the current {{{<self/>}}} in the up-down protocol.
+
+Every {{{<child/>}}} object has a child_handle, which must be specified for the
+"create", "get", "set", and "destroy" actions. Every {{{<child/>}}} also has a
+self_handle attribute which indicates the {{{<self/>}}} object with which this
+{{{<child/>}}} object is associated.
+
+Payload data which can be configured in a {{{<child/>}}} object:
+
+bpki_cert:: (element)
+ BPKI CA certificate for this {{{<child/>}}}. This is used as part of
+ the certificate chain when validating incoming TLS and CMS
+ messages. If the bpki_glue certificate is in use (below), the
+ bpki_cert certificate should be issued by the bpki_glue
+ certificate; otherwise, the bpki_cert certificate should be issued
+ by the bpki_cert certificate in the {{{<self/>}}} object.
+
+bpki_glue:: (element)
+ Another BPKI CA certificate for this {{{<child/>}}}, usually not needed.
+ Certain pathological cross-certification cases require a
+ two-certificate chain due to issuer name conflicts. If used, the
+ bpki_glue certificate should be the issuer of the bpki_cert
+ certificate and should be issued by the bpki_cert certificate in
+ the {{{<self/>}}} object; if not needed, the bpki_glue certificate
+ should be left unset.
+
+Control attributes that can be set to "yes" to force actions:
+
+reissue::
+ Not implemented, may be removed from protocol.
+
+=== <repository/> object ===
+
+The {{{<repository/>}}} object represents the RPKI engine's view of a
+particular publication repository used by the current {{{<self/>}}} object.
+
+Every {{{<repository/>}}} object has a repository_handle, which must be
+specified for the "create", "get", "set", and "destroy" actions. Every
+{{{<repository/>}}} also has a self_handle attribute which indicates the {{{<self/>}}}
+object with which this {{{<repository/>}}} object is associated.
+
+Payload data which can be configured in a {{{<repository/>}}} object:
+
+peer_contact_uri:: (attribute)
+ HTTP URI used to contact this repository.
+
+bpki_cms_cert:: (element)
+ BPKI CMS CA certificate for this {{{<repository/>}}}. This is used as part
+ of the certificate chain when validating incoming CMS messages If
+ the bpki_cms_glue certificate is in use (below), the bpki_cms_cert
+ certificate should be issued by the bpki_cms_glue certificate;
+ otherwise, the bpki_cms_cert certificate should be issued by the
+ bpki_cert certificate in the {{{<self/>}}} object.
+
+bpki_cms_glue:: (element)
+ Another BPKI CMS CA certificate for this {{{<repository/>}}}, usually not
+ needed. Certain pathological cross-certification cases require a
+ two-certificate chain due to issuer name conflicts. If used, the
+ bpki_cms_glue certificate should be the issuer of the
+ bpki_cms_cert certificate and should be issued by the bpki_cert
+ certificate in the {{{<self/>}}} object; if not needed, the
+ bpki_cms_glue certificate should be left unset.
+
+At present there are no control attributes for {{{<repository/>}}} objects.
+
+=== <route_origin/> object ===
+
+This section is out-of-date. The {{{<route_origin/>}}} object
+has been replaced by the {{{<list_roa_requests/>}}} IRDB query,
+but the documentation for that hasn't been written yet.
+
+The {{{<route_origin/>}}} object is a kind of prototype for a ROA. It
+contains all the information needed to generate a ROA once the RPKI
+engine obtains the appropriate RPKI certificates from its parent(s).
+
+Note that a {{{<route_origin/>}}} object represents a ROA to be generated on
+behalf of {{{<self/>}}}, not on behalf of a {{{<child/>}}}. Thus, a hosted entity
+that has no children but which does need to generate ROAs would be
+represented by a hosted {{{<self/>}}} with no {{{<child/>}}} objects but one or
+more {{{<route_origin/>}}} objects. While lumping ROA generation in with
+the other RPKI engine activities may seem a little odd at first, it's
+a natural consequence of the design requirement that the RPKI daemon
+never transmit private keys across the network in any form; given this
+requirement, the RPKI engine that holds the private keys for an RPKI
+certificate must also be the engine which generates any ROAs that
+derive from that RPKI certificate.
+
+The precise content of the {{{<route_origin/>}}} has changed over time as
+the underlying ROA specification has changed. The current
+implementation as of this writing matches what we expect to see in
+draft-ietf-sidr-roa-format-03, once it is issued. In particular, note
+that the exactMatch boolean from the -02 draft has been replaced by
+the prefix and maxLength encoding used in the -03 draft.
+
+Payload data which can be configured in a {{{<route_origin/>}}} object:
+
+asn:: (attribute)
+ Autonomous System Number (ASN) to place in the generated ROA. A
+ single ROA can only grant authorization to a single ASN; multiple
+ ASNs require multiple ROAs, thus multiple {{{<route_origin/>}}} objects.
+
+ipv4:: (attribute)
+ List of IPv4 prefix and maxLength values, see below for format.
+
+ipv6:: (attribute)
+ List of IPv6 prefix and maxLength values, see below for format.
+
+Control attributes that can be set to "yes" to force actions:
+
+suppress_publication::
+ Not implemented, may be removed from protocol.
+
+The lists of IPv4 and IPv6 prefix and maxLength values are represented
+as comma-separated text strings, with no whitespace permitted. Each
+entry in such a string represents a single prefix/maxLength pair.
+
+ABNF for these address lists:
+
+{{{
+ <ROAIPAddress> ::= <address> "/" <prefixlen> [ "-" <max_prefixlen> ]
+ ; Where <max_prefixlen> defaults to the same
+ ; value as <prefixlen>.
+
+ <ROAIPAddressList> ::= <ROAIPAddress> *( "," <ROAIPAddress> )
+}}}
+
+For example, {{{10.0.1.0/24-32,10.0.2.0/24}}}, which is a shorthand
+form of {{{10.0.1.0/24-32,10.0.2.0/24-24}}}.
+
+== Operations initiated by the RPKI engine ==
+
+The left-right protocol also includes queries from the RPKI engine
+back to the IRDB. These queries do not follow the message-passing
+pattern used in the IRBE-initiated part of the protocol. Instead,
+there's a single query back to the IRDB, with a corresponding
+response. The CMS encoding are the same as in the rest of
+the protocol, but the BPKI certificates will be different as the
+back-queries and responses form a separate communication channel.
+
+=== <list_resources/> messages ===
+
+The {{{<list_resources/>}}} query and response allow the RPKI engine to ask
+the IRDB for information about resources assigned to a particular
+child. The query must include both a {{{self_handle}}} attribute naming
+the {{{<self/>}}} that is making the request and also a {{{child_handle}}}
+attribute naming the child that is the subject of the query. The
+query and response also allow an optional //tag// attribute of the
+same form used elsewhere in this protocol, to allow batching.
+
+A {{{<list_resources/>}}} response includes the following attributes, along
+with the tag (if specified), {{{self_handle}}}, and {{{child_handle}}} copied
+from the request:
+
+valid_until::
+ A timestamp indicating the date and time at which certificates
+ generated by the RPKI engine for these data should expire. The
+ timestamp is expressed as an XML {{{xsd:dateTime}}}, must be
+ expressed in UTC, and must carry the "Z" suffix indicating UTC.
+
+asn::
+ A list of autonomous sequence numbers, expressed as a
+ comma-separated sequence of decimal integers with no whitespace.
+
+ipv4::
+ A list of IPv4 address prefixes and ranges, expressed as a
+ comma-separated list of prefixes and ranges with no whitespace.
+ See below for format details.
+
+ipv6::
+ A list of IPv6 address prefixes and ranges, expressed as a
+ comma-separated list of prefixes and ranges with no whitespace.
+ See below for format details.
+
+Entries in a list of address prefixes and ranges can be either
+prefixes, which are written in the usual address/prefixlen notation,
+or ranges, which are expressed as a pair of addresses denoting the
+beginning and end of the range, written in ascending order separated
+by a single "-" character. This format is superficially similar to
+the format used for prefix and maxLength values in the {{{<route_origin/>}}}
+object, but the semantics differ: note in particular that
+{{{<route_origin/>}}} objects don't allow ranges, while {{{<list_resources/>}}}
+messages don't allow a maxLength specification.
+
+== Error handling ==
+
+Error in this protocol are handled at two levels.
+
+Since all messages in this protocol are conveyed over HTTP
+connections, basic errors are indicated via the HTTP response code.
+4xx and 5xx responses indicate that something bad happened. Errors
+that make it impossible to decode a query or encode a response are
+handled in this way.
+
+Where possible, errors will result in a {{{<report_error/>}}} message which
+takes the place of the expected protocol response message.
+{{{<report_error/>}}} messages are CMS-signed XML messages like the rest of
+this protocol, and thus can be archived to provide an audit trail.
+
+{{{<report_error/>}}} messages only appear in replies, never in queries.
+The {{{<report_error/>}}} message can appear on either the "forward" (IRBE
+as client of RPKI engine) or "back" (RPKI engine as client of IRDB)
+communication channel.
+
+The {{{<report_error/>}}} message includes an optional //tag// attribute to
+assist in matching the error with a particular query when using
+batching, and also includes a {{{self_handle}}} attribute indicating the
+{{{<self/>}}} that issued the error.
+
+The error itself is conveyed in the {{{error_code}}} (attribute). The
+value of this attribute is a token indicating the specific error that
+occurred. At present this will be the name of a Python exception; the
+production version of this protocol will nail down the allowed error
+tokens here, probably in the RelaxNG schema.
+
+The body of the {{{<report_error/>}}} element itself is an optional text
+string; if present, this is debugging information. At present this
+capabilty is not used, debugging information goes to syslog.