<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
<!ENTITY rfc2119 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc2578 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2578.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc2579 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2579.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc2580 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2580.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc3411 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3411.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc3412 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3412.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc3413 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3413.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc3415 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3415.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc3418 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3418.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc3419 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3419.xml">
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-isms-tmsm SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-isms-tmsm.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc3410 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3410.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc3414 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3414.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc3584 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3584.xml">
]>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc strict="yes" ?>
<?rfc rfcedstyle="yes" ?>
<rfc category="std" docName="draft-ietf-isms-transport-security-model-10"
     ipr="full3978">
  <!--
$Id: draft-ietf-isms-transport-security-model.xml,v 1.15 2008/10/28 18:58:25 H73653 Exp $
  -->

  <front>
    <title abbrev="Transport Security Model for SNMP">Transport Security Model
    for SNMP</title>

    <author fullname="David Harrington" initials="D" surname="Harrington">
      <organization>Huawei Technologies (USA)</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>1700 Alma Dr. Suite 100</street>

          <city>Plano, TX 75075</city>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <phone>+1 603 436 8634</phone>

        <email>dharrington@huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author initials="W.H." surname="Hardaker" fullname="Wes Hardaker">
      <organization>Sparta, Inc.</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>P.O. Box 382</street>
          <city>Davis</city>
          <region>CA</region>
          <code>95617</code>
          <country>US</country>
        </postal>
        <phone>+1 530 792 1913</phone>
        <email>ietf@hardakers.net</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <date year="2008" />

    <area>Operations and Management</area>

    <!-- <workgroup>ISMS WG</workgroup> -->

    <keyword>Network Management</keyword>

    <keyword>Simple Network Management Protocol</keyword>

    <keyword>SNMP</keyword>

    <keyword>Transport Security Model</keyword>

    <keyword>Security Model</keyword>

    <abstract>
      <t>This memo describes a Transport Security Model for the Simple Network
      Management Protocol.</t>

      <t>This memo also defines a portion of the Management Information Base
      (MIB) for monitoring and managing the Transport Security Model for SNMP.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <section title="Introduction">
      <t>This memo describes a Transport Security Model for the Simple Network
      Management Protocol, for use with secure Transport Models in the
      Transport Subsystem <xref target="I-D.ietf-isms-tmsm"></xref>.</t>

      <t>This memo also defines a portion of the Management Information Base
      (MIB) for monitoring and managing
      the Transport Security Model for SNMP.</t>

      <t>It is important to understand the SNMP architecture and the
      terminology of the architecture to understand where the Transport
      Security Model described in this memo fits into the architecture and
      interacts with other subsystems and models within the architecture. It
      is expected that reader will have also read and understood RFC3411 <xref
      target="RFC3411"></xref>, RFC3412 <xref target="RFC3412"></xref>,
      RFC3413 <xref target="RFC3413"></xref>, and RFC3418 <xref
      target="RFC3418"></xref>.</t>

      <section title="The Internet-Standard Management Framework">
        <t>For a detailed overview of the documents that describe the current
        Internet-Standard Management Framework, please refer to section 7 of
        RFC 3410 <xref target="RFC3410"></xref>.</t>

        <t>Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store,
        termed the Management Information Base or MIB. MIB objects are
        generally accessed through the Simple Network Management Protocol
        (SNMP). Objects in the MIB are defined using the mechanisms defined in
        the Structure of Management Information (SMI). This memo specifies a
        MIB module that is compliant to the SMIv2, which is described in STD
        58, RFC 2578 <xref target="RFC2578"></xref>, STD 58, RFC 2579 <xref
        target="RFC2579"></xref> and STD 58, RFC 2580 <xref
        target="RFC2580"></xref>.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Conventions">
        <t>For consistency with SNMP-related specifications, this document
        favors terminology as defined in STD62 rather than favoring
        terminology that is consistent with non-SNMP specifications that use
        different variations of the same terminology. This is consistent with
        the IESG decision to not require the SNMPv3 terminology be modified to
        match the usage of other non-SNMP specifications when SNMPv3 was
        advanced to Full Standard.</t>

        <t>Authentication in this document typically refers to the English
        meaning of "serving to prove the authenticity of" the message, not
        data source authentication or peer identity authentication.</t>

        <t>The terms "manager" and "agent" are not used in this document,
        because in the RFC 3411 architecture, all SNMP entities have the
        capability of acting as either manager or agent or both depending on
        the SNMP applications included in the engine. Where distinction is
        required, the application names of Command Generator, Command
        Responder, Notification Originator, Notification Receiver, and Proxy
        Forwarder are used. See "SNMP Applications" <xref
        target="RFC3413"></xref> for further information.</t>

        <t>While security protocols frequently refer to a user, the
        terminology used in RFC3411 <xref target="RFC3411"></xref> and in this
        memo is "principal". A principal is the "who" on whose behalf services
        are provided or processing takes place. A principal can be, among
        other things, an individual acting in a particular role; a set of
        individuals, with each acting in a particular role; an application or
        a set of applications, or a combination of these within an
        administrative domain.</t>

        <t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
        "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
        document are to be interpreted as described in <xref
        target="RFC2119"></xref>.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Modularity">
        <t>The reader is expected to have read and understood the description
        of the SNMP architecture, as defined in <xref
        target="RFC3411"></xref>, and the architecture extension specified in
        "Transport Subsystem for the Simple Network Management Protocol" <xref
        target="I-D.ietf-isms-tmsm"></xref>, which enables the use of external
        "lower layer transport" protocols to provide message security, tied
        into the SNMP architecture through the Transport Subsystem. The
        Transport Security Model is designed to work with such lower-layer
        secure Transport Models.</t>

        <t>In keeping with the RFC 3411 design decisions to use self-contained
        documents, this memo includes the elements of procedure plus
        associated MIB objects which are needed for processing the Transport
        Security Model for SNMP. These MIB objects SHOULD NOT be referenced in
        other documents. This allows the Transport Security Model to be
        designed and documented as independent and self-contained, having no
        direct impact on other modules, and allowing this module to be
        upgraded and supplemented as the need arises, and to move along the
        standards track on different time-lines from other modules.</t>

        <t>This modularity of specification is not meant to be interpreted as
        imposing any specific requirements on implementation.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Motivation">
        <t>This memo describes a Security Model to make use of Transport
        Models that use lower layer secure transports and existing and
        commonly deployed security infrastructures. This Security Model is
        designed to meet the security and operational needs of network
        administrators, maximize usability in operational environments to
        achieve high deployment success and at the same time minimize
        implementation and deployment costs to minimize the time until
        deployment is possible.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Constraints">
        <t>The design of this SNMP Security Model is also influenced by the
        following constraints: <list style="numbers">
            <t>In times of network stress, the security protocol and its
            underlying security mechanisms SHOULD NOT depend solely upon the
            ready availability of other network services (e.g., Network Time
            Protocol (NTP) or Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting
            (AAA) protocols).</t>

            <t>When the network is not under stress, the Security Model and
            its underlying security mechanisms MAY depend upon the ready
            availability of other network services.</t>

            <t>It may not be possible for the Security Model to determine when
            the network is under stress.</t>

            <t>A Security Model should require no changes to the SNMP
            architecture.</t>

            <t>A Security Model should require no changes to the underlying
            security protocol.</t>
          </list></t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <!-- ********************************************* -->

    <section title="How the Transport Security Model Fits in the Architecture">
      <t>The Transport Security Model is designed to fit into the RFC3411
      architecture as a Security Model in the Security Subsystem, and to
      utilize the services of a secure Transport Model.</t>
    
      <t>   For incoming messages, a secure Transport Model will pass
   a tmStateReference cache, described later.  To maintain RFC3411 modularity, the Transport Model will not know
      which securityModel will process the incoming message; the Message
      Processing Model will determine this. If the Transport Security Model is used with a non-secure
      Transport Model, then the cache will not exist or not be populated with
      security parameters, which will cause the Transport Security Model to
      return an error (see section 5.2) </t>      
   
   <t>The Transport Security Model will create the securityName and securityLevel to be passed to applications, and verify that the tmTransportSecurityLevel reported by the Transport Model is at least as strong as the securityLevel requested by the Message Processing Model.</t>
      
      <t>For outgoing messages, the Transport Security Model will create a tmStateReference cache (or use an existing one), and pass the tmStateReference to the specified Transport Model.</t>



      <section title="Security Capabilities of this Model">
        <section title="Threats">
                  <t>The Transport Security Model is compatible with the RFC3411 architecture, and provides protection against the threats identified
          by the RFC 3411 architecture. However, the Transport Security
          Model does not provide security mechanisms such as authentication
          and encryption itself, so it SHOULD always be used with a Transport
          Model that provides appropriate security. Which threats are addressed and how they are mitigated depends on the Transport Model.</t>

        </section>

        <section title="Security Levels">
          <t>The RFC 3411 architecture recognizes three levels of security:
          <list>
              <t>- without authentication and without privacy
              (noAuthNoPriv)</t>

              <t>- with authentication but without privacy (authNoPriv)</t>

              <t>- with authentication and with privacy (authPriv)</t>
            </list></t>

          <t>The model-independent securityLevel parameter is used to request
          specific levels of security for outgoing messages, and to assert
          that specific levels of security were applied during the transport
          and processing of incoming messages.</t>

          <t>The transport layer algorithms used to provide security SHOULD
          NOT be exposed to the Transport Security Model, as the Transport
          Security Model has no mechanisms by which it can test whether an
          assertion made by a Transport Model is accurate.</t>

          <t>The Transport Security Model trusts that the underlying secure
          transport connection has been properly configured to support
          security characteristics at least as strong as reported in
          tmTransportSecurityLevel.</t>
        </section>
      </section>

      <section title="Transport Sessions">
        <t>The Transport Security Model does not work with transport sessions
   directly.  Instead the transport-related state is associated with
   a unique combination of transportDomain, transportAddress, securityName
   and securityLevel, and referenced via the tmStateReference parameter.
   How and if this is mapped to a particular transport or channel is
   the responsibility of the Transport Subsystem.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Coexistence">
              <t>In the RFC3411 architecture, a Message Processing Model determines
        which Security Model should be called. As of this writing, IANA has
        registered four Message Processing Models (SNMPv1, SNMPv2c,
        SNMPv2u/SNMPv2*, and SNMPv3) and three other Security Models (SNMPv1,
        SNMPv2c, and the User-based Security Model).</t>
      <section title="Coexistence with Message Processing Models">

        <t>The SNMPv1 and SNMPv2c message processing described in RFC3584 (BCP
        74) <xref target="RFC3584"></xref> always selects the SNMPv1(1)
        and SNMPv2c(2) Security Models. Since there is no mechanism defined in RFC3584 to
   select an alternative Security Model, SNMPv1 and SNMPv2c messages
   cannot use the Transport Security Model.  Such messages can still
   be conveyed over a secure transport protocol, but the Transport
   Security Model will not be invoked.</t>

        <t>The SNMPv2u/SNMPv2* Message Processing Model is a historic artifact for which there is no existing IETF specification.</t>

        <t>The SNMPv3 message processing defined in RFC3412 <xref
        target="RFC3412"></xref>, extracts the securityModel from the
        msgSecurityModel field of an incoming SNMPv3Message. When this
        value is transportSecurityModel(YY),
        security processing is directed to the Transport Security Model. For
        an outgoing message to be secured using the Transport Security Model,
        the application should specify a securityModel parameter value of transportSecurityModel(YY) in the sendPdu ASI.</t>

        <t>[-- NOTE to RFC editor: replace YY with actual IANA-assigned
        number, and remove this note. ]</t>
        </section>
      <section title="Coexistence with Other Security Models">
        <t>The Transport Security Model uses its own MIB module for processing
        to maintain independence from other Security Models. This allows the
        Transport Security Model to coexist with other Security Models, such
        as the User-based Security Model.</t>
         </section>
         <section title="Coexistence with Transport Models">
        <t>The Transport Security Model may work with multiple
   Transport Models, but the RFC3411 application service
   interfaces (ASIs) do not carry a value for the Transport Model. 
The MIB module defined in this memo allows an administrator
        to configure whether or not TSM prepends a
        transport model prefix to the securityName. This will allow SNMP applications to consider transport model as a factor when making decisions, such as access control, notification generation, and proxy forwarding.</t>
        
        </section>
         </section>
      </section>

      
    <!-- **************************************************** -->
  <section title="Cached Information and References">
    
          <t>When performing SNMP processing, there are two levels of state
   information that may need to be retained:  the immediate state
   linking a request-response pair, and potentially longer-term state
   relating to transport and security.</t>
      
      <t>The RFC3411 architecture uses caches to maintain the short-term
   message state, and uses references in the ASIs to pass this
   information between subsystems.</t>
   
   <t>This document defines the requirements for a cache to handle the
   longer-term transport state information, using a tmStateReference
   parameter to pass this information between subsystems.</t>

      <t>To simplify the elements of
      procedure, the release of state information is not always explicitly
      specified. As a general rule, if state information is available when a
      message being processed gets discarded, the state related to that
      message SHOULD also be discarded. If state information is available
      when a relationship between engines is severed, such as the closing of a
      transport session, the state information for that relationship SHOULD
      also be discarded.</t>
      
       <t>Since the contents of a cache are meaningful only within an
        implementation, and not on-the-wire, the format of the cache is
         implementation-specific.</t>
        
      <section title="securityStateReference">
        <t>The securityStateReference parameter is defined in RFC3411. Its
   primary purpose is to provide a mapping between a request and the
   corresponding response. This cache is not accessible to Transport
   Models, and an entry is typically only retained for the lifetime of
   a request-response pair of messages.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="tmStateReference">
<!--        <t> The state referenced by tmStateReference may be saved across multiple
        messages, in a Local Configuration Datastore (LCD), as compared to
        securityStateReference which is usually only saved for the life of a
        request-response pair of messages.</t>
-->
<t>For each transport session, information about the transport security
   is stored in a cache. The tmStateReference parameter is used to
   pass model-specific and mechanism-specific parameters between the Transport
   subsystem and transport-aware Security Models.</t>
   <t>The tmStateReference cache will typically remain valid for the duration
   of the transport session, and hence may be used for several messages.</t>
<t>Since this cache is only used within an implementation, and not
   on-the-wire, the precise contents and format are implementation-
   dependent. However, for interoperability between Transport Models
   and transport-aware Security Models, entries in this cache must
   include at least the following fields:</t>
   <t>
   <list>
				<t>transportDomain</t>
				<t>transportAddress</t>
				<t>tmSecurityName</t>
				<t>tmRequestedSecurityLevel</t>				
				<t>tmTransportSecurityLevel</t>
				<t>tmSameSecurity</t>
				<t>tmSessionID</t>
 </list></t>
<section title="Transport information">
<t>Information about the source of an incoming SNMP message is passed up
   from the Transport subsystem as far as the Message Processing subsystem.
   However these parameters are not included in the processIncomingMsg ASI
   defined in RFC3411, and hence this information is not directly available
   to the Security Model.</t>
   <t>A transport-aware Security Model might wish to take account of the
   transport protocol and originating address when authenticating the
   request, and setting up the authorization parameters. It is therefore
   necessary for the Transport Model to include this information in the
   tmStateReference cache, so that it is accessible to the Security Model.</t>
   <t>
   <list style="symbols">
				<t>transportDomain: 
         the transport protocol (and hence the Transport Model) used to 
         receive the incoming message</t>
         <t>transportAddress: 
         the source of the incoming message.
</t>
	</list></t>
	<t>The ASIs used for processing an outgoing message all
   include explicit transportDomain and transportAddress parameters.
   The values within the securityStateReference cache might override these parameters for outgoing messages.
</t>
</section>
<section title="securityName">
<t>There are actually three distinct "identities" that can be
   identified during the processing of an SNMP request over a secure
   transport:
</t>
<t>
<list style="symbols">
	<t>transport principal:
         the transport-authenticated identity, on whose behalf the
         secure transport connection was (or should be) established.
         This value is transport-, mechanism- and implementation-
         specific, and is only used within a given Transport Model.
</t>
<t>tmSecurityName:
         a human-readable name (in snmpAdminString format)
         representing this transport identity. This value is
         transport- and implementation-specific, and is only
         used (directly) by the Transport and Security Models.
</t>
<t>securityName:
         a human-readable name (in snmpAdminString format)
         representing the SNMP principal in a model-independent
         manner. 
</t>
</list></t>
<t>The transport principal may or may not be the same as
   the tmSecurityName. Similarly, the tmSecurityName may or may not
   be the same as the securityName as seen by the Application and
   Access Control subsystems. In particular, a non-transport-aware
   Security Model will ignore tmSecurityName completely when determining
   the SNMP securityName.
</t>
<t>However it is important that the mapping between the transport
   principal and the SNMP securityName (for transport-aware Security
   Models) is consistent and predictable, to allow configuration of
   suitable access control and the establishment of transport connections.
</t>

</section>
<section title="securityLevel">
<t>There are two distinct issues relating to security level as
   applied to secure transports. For clarity, these are handled
   by separate fields in the tmStateReference cache:
</t>
<t>
<list style="symbols">
	<t>tmTransportSecurityLevel:
         an indication from the Transport Model of the level of
         security offered by this session. The Security Model
         can use this to ensure that incoming messages were
         suitably protected before acting on them.
</t>
<t>tmRequestedSecurityLevel:
         an indication from the Security Model of the level
         of security required to be provided by the transport
         protocol. The Transport Model can use this to
         ensure that outgoing messages will not be sent over
         an insufficiently secure session.
</t>
</list></t>
</section>

        
<section title="Session Information">
<t>For security reasons, if a secure transport session is closed
   between the time a request message is received and the corresponding
   response message is sent, then the response message SHOULD be
   discarded, even if a new session has been established. The SNMPv3
   WG decided that this should be a SHOULD architecturally, and it is
   a security-model-specific decision whether to REQUIRE this.
</t>

<t>
<list style="symbols">
	<t>tmSameSecurity:
        this flag is used by a transport-aware Security Model
        to indicate whether the Transport Model MUST enforce
        this restriction.</t>
        <t>tmSessionID:
        in order to verify whether the session has changed, the
        Transport Model must be able to compare the session used
        to receive the original request with the one to be used
        to send the response. This typically requires some form
        of session identifier. This value is only ever used by
        the Transport Model, so the format and interpretation of
        this field are model-specific and implementation-dependent.
</t>
</list></t>
        <t>When processing an outgoing message, if tmSameSecurity
        is true, then the tmSessionID MUST match the current transport session, 
        otherwise the message MUST be discarded, and the dispatcher 
        notified that sending the message failed.</t>
</section>

      </section>


    <section title="Transport Security Model Cached Information">

<t>The Transport Security Model has specific responsibilities regarding the cached information.</t>
      <section title="securityStateReference">
              <t>The Transport Security Model adds
   the tmStateReference received from the processIncomingMsg
   ASI to the securityStateReference.  This tmStateReference can
   then be retrieved during the generateResponseMsg ASI, so that
   it can be passed back to the Transport Model.
</t>
              <t>The Transport Security Model REQUIRES that the security parameters
	    used for a response are the same as those used for the
	    corresponding request. This security model
	    sets the tmSameSecurity flag to true in the tmStateReference 
	    before passing it to the transport model.</t>
	    

      </section>
      
      <section title="tmStateReference">
       
        <t>For outgoing messages, the Transport Security Model uses
        parameters provided by the SNMP application to lookup or create a
        tmStateReference. This security model uses the tmStateReference stored as part of the securityStateReference when appropriate. </t>
        
        <t>For incoming messages, the Transport Security Model uses
        parameters provided in the tmStateReference cache to determine the securityName, and to verify adequate security levels. </t>

      </section>

      <section title="Prefixes and securityNames">

        <t>The SNMP-VIEW-BASED-ACM-MIB <xref target="RFC3415"></xref>, the SNMP-TARGET-MIB module <xref target="RFC3413"></xref>,  and other MIB modules contain objects to configure security parameters for use by applications such as access control, notification generation, and proxy forwarding. </t>
      <t>IANA maintains a registry for transport domains and the corresponding prefix.</t>
      <t>If snmpTsmConfigurationUsePrefix is set to true then all securityNames provided by, or provided to, the Transport Security Model MUST include a valid transport domain prefix.</t>
       <t>If snmpTsmConfigurationUsePrefix is set to false then all securityNames provided by, or provided to, the Transport Security Model MUST NOT include a transport domain prefix.</t>
       <t>The tmSecurityName in the tmStateReference stored as part of the securityStateReference does not contain a prefix.</t>
   
      </section>

    </section>

    </section>
    <section title="Processing an Outgoing Message">
      <t>An error indication may return an OID and value for an incremented
      counter and a value for securityLevel, and values for contextEngineID
      and contextName for the counter, and the securityStateReference if the
      information is available at the point where the error is detected.</t>

      <section title="Security Processing for an Outgoing Message">
        <t>This section describes the procedure followed by the Transport
        Security Model.</t>

        <t>The parameters needed for generating a message are supplied to the
        Security Model by the Message Processing Model via the
        generateRequestMsg() or the generateResponseMsg() ASI. The Transport
        Subsystem architectural extension has added the transportDomain,
        transportAddress, and tmStateReference parameters to the original
        RFC3411 ASIs.</t>

        <figure>
          <artwork><![CDATA[
  statusInformation =                -- success or errorIndication
        generateRequestMsg(
        IN   messageProcessingModel  -- typically, SNMP version
        IN   globalData              -- message header, admin data
        IN   maxMessageSize          -- of the sending SNMP entity
        IN   transportDomain         -- (NEW) specified by application
        IN   transportAddress        -- (NEW) specified by application
        IN   securityModel           -- for the outgoing message
        IN   securityEngineID        -- authoritative SNMP entity
        IN   securityName            -- on behalf of this principal
        IN   securityLevel           -- Level of Security requested
        IN   scopedPDU               -- message (plaintext) payload
        OUT  securityParameters      -- filled in by Security Module
        OUT  wholeMsg                -- complete generated message
        OUT  wholeMsgLength          -- length of generated message
        OUT  tmStateReference        -- (NEW)  transport info        
             )
 ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <figure>
          <artwork><![CDATA[
statusInformation = -- success or errorIndication
        generateResponseMsg(
        IN   messageProcessingModel  -- typically, SNMP version
        IN   globalData              -- message header, admin data
        IN   maxMessageSize          -- of the sending SNMP entity
        IN   transportDomain         -- (NEW) specified by application
        IN   transportAddress        -- (NEW) specified by application
        IN   securityModel           -- for the outgoing message
        IN   securityEngineID        -- authoritative SNMP entity
        IN   securityName            -- on behalf of this principal
        IN   securityLevel           -- Level of Security requested
        IN   scopedPDU               -- message (plaintext) payload
        IN   securityStateReference  -- reference to security state
                                     -- information from original
                                     -- request
        OUT  securityParameters      -- filled in by Security Module
        OUT  wholeMsg                -- complete generated message
        OUT  wholeMsgLength          -- length of generated message
        OUT  tmStateReference        -- (NEW) transport info
             )]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t></t>
      </section>

      <section title="Elements of Procedure for Outgoing Messages">
        <t>1) If there is a securityStateReference (Response or Report
         message), then this security model uses the cached information rather 
         than the information provided by the ASI. Extract the securityName and 
         securityLevel and 
         tmStateReference from the securityStateReference cache. Set the
        tmRequestedSecurityLevel to the value of the extracted
        securityLevel. Set the tmSameSecurity parameter in the
        tmStateReference cache to true. The cachedSecurityData for this message can now
        be discarded.</t>
        
        <t>2) If there is no securityStateReference then create a
        tmStateReference cache with tmRequestedSecurityLevel set to
        the value of securityLevel, the tmSecurityName set to securityName, and  tmSameSecurity set to false. </t>
        
        <t>If the snmpTsmConfigurationUsePrefix object is set to
	    true, then use the transportDomain to look up the corresponding prefix. (Since the securityStateReference stores the tmStateReference with the unprefixed tmSecurityName for the incoming message, prefix stripping only occurs when we are not using the securityStateReference).
	  <list style="letters">
	    <t>  	
	    If the prefix lookup fails for any reason, then the 
	    snmpTsmUnknownPrefixes counter is incremented, an error indication 
	    is returned to the calling module, and message processing stops.  
   	                  <vspace blankLines='1' />
   	    If the lookup succeeds, but the prefix returned does not match the 
   	    prefix in the securityName, or there is no prefix in the securityName, 
   	    then the snmpTsmInvalidPrefixes
   	    counter is incremented, an error indication is returned
   	    to the calling module, and message processing stops.
              <vspace blankLines='1' /> 	
        Strip the transport-specific prefix and trailing ':'
	    character (ASCII 0x3a) from the tmSecurityName.   </t>  
	  </list>
	</t>
        <t>3) Set securityParameters to a zero-length OCTET STRING ('0400').</t>

        <t>4) Combine the message parts into a wholeMsg and calculate
        wholeMsgLength.</t>

        <t>5) The wholeMsg, wholeMsgLength, securityParameters and
        tmStateReference are returned to the calling Message Processing Model
        with the statusInformation set to success.</t>
      </section>

      <!--**************************************************** -->
    </section>

    <section title="Processing an Incoming SNMP Message">
      <t>An error indication may return an OID and value for an incremented
      counter and a value for securityLevel, and values for contextEngineID
      and contextName for the counter, and the securityStateReference if the
      information is available at the point where the error is detected.</t>

      <section title="Security Processing for an Incoming Message">
        <t>This section describes the procedure followed by the Transport
        Security Model whenever it receives an incoming message from a Message
        Processing Model. The ASI from a Message Processing Model to the
        Security Subsystem for a received message is:</t>

        <figure>
          <artwork><![CDATA[
statusInformation =  -- errorIndication or success
                         -- error counter OID/value if error
processIncomingMsg(
IN   messageProcessingModel    -- typically, SNMP version
IN   maxMessageSize            -- from the received message
IN   securityParameters        -- from the received message
IN   securityModel             -- from the received message
IN   securityLevel             -- from the received message
IN   wholeMsg                  -- as received on the wire
IN   wholeMsgLength            -- length as received on the wire
IN   tmStateReference          -- (NEW) from the Transport Model
OUT  securityEngineID          -- authoritative SNMP entity
OUT  securityName              -- identification of the principal
OUT  scopedPDU,                -- message (plaintext) payload
OUT  maxSizeResponseScopedPDU  -- maximum size sender can handle
OUT  securityStateReference    -- reference to security state
 )                         -- information, needed for response
        ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t></t>
      </section>

      <section title="Elements of Procedure for Incoming Messages">
        <t>1) Set the securityEngineID to the local snmpEngineID.</t>

        <t>2) If tmStateReference does not refer to a cache containing
        values for transportDomain, transportAddress, tmSecurityName and
        tmTransportSecurityLevel, then the snmpTsmInvalidCaches
        counter is incremented, an error indication is returned to the
        calling module, and Security Model processing stops for this
        message.</t>
    
        <t>3) Copy the tmSecurityName to securityName. </t>
        
        <t>If the snmpTsmConfigurationUsePrefix object is set to true, then 
        use the transportDomain to look up the corresponding prefix.
	  <list style="letters">
		<t> If the prefix lookup fails for any
	    reason, then the snmpTsmUnknownPrefixes counter is
	    incremented and an error indication is returned to the
	    calling module, and message processing stops.
   	                  <vspace blankLines='1' />
   	    If the lookup succeeds, but the prefix length is less than one or greater 
   	    than four octets, then the snmpTsmInvalidPrefixes counter is incremented, an 
   	    error indication is returned to the calling module, and message 
   	    processing stops.	    
	      <vspace blankLines='1' />
	    Set the securityName to be the concatenation of
	    the prefix, a ':' character (ASCII 0x3a)
	    and the tmSecurityName. 
	    </t>
	      
	  </list>
	</t>

        <t>4) Compare the value of tmTransportSecurityLevel in the
        tmStateReference cache to the value of the securityLevel parameter
        passed in the processIncomingMsg ASI. If securityLevel specifies
        privacy (Priv), and tmTransportSecurityLevel specifies no privacy
        (noPriv), or securityLevel specifies authentication (auth) and
        tmTransportSecurityLevel specifies no authentication (noAuth) was
        provided by the Transport Model, then the
        snmpTsmInadequateSecurityLevels counter is incremented, and an error
        indication (unsupportedSecurityLevel) together with the OID and value
        of the incremented counter is returned to the calling module.
        Transport Security Model processing stops for this message.</t>

        <t>5) The security data is cached as cachedSecurityData, so that a
        possible response to this message will use the same security
        parameters. Then securityStateReference is set for subsequent
        reference to this cached data. For Transport Security Model, the
        securityStateReference includes a reference to the tmStateReference
        cache.</t>  

        <t>6) The scopedPDU component is extracted from the wholeMsg.</t>

        <t>7) The maxSizeResponseScopedPDU is calculated. This is the maximum
        size allowed for a scopedPDU for a possible Response message.</t>

        <t>8) The statusInformation is set to success and a return is made to
        the calling module passing back the OUT parameters as specified in the
        processIncomingMsg ASI.</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <!-- **************************************************** -->

    <section title="MIB Module Overview">
      <t>This MIB module provides objects for use only by the Transport Security
      Model. It defines a configuration scalar and related error counters.</t>

      <section title="Structure of the MIB Module">
        <t>Objects in this MIB module are arranged into subtrees. Each subtree
        is organized as a set of related objects. The overall structure and
        assignment of objects to their subtrees, and the intended purpose of
        each subtree, is shown below.</t>

      <section title="The snmpTsmStats Subtree">
        <t>This subtree contains error counters specific to the Transport Security
        Model.</t>
      </section>
      
      <section title="The snmpTsmConfiguration Subtree"> <t>This
      subtree contains a configuration object that enables
      administrators to specify if they want a transport domain prefix 
      prepended to securityNames for use by applications.</t></section>
      </section>
      
      <!-- 	***************************************************** 	-->

      <section title="Relationship to Other MIB Modules">
        <t>Some management objects defined in other MIB modules are applicable
        to an entity implementing the Transport Security Model. In particular,
        it is assumed that an entity implementing the Transport Security Model
        will implement the SNMP-FRAMEWORK-MIB <xref target="RFC3411"></xref>, the SNMP-TARGET-MIB <xref target="RFC3413"></xref>, the SNMP-VIEW-BASED-ACM-MIB <xref target="RFC3415"></xref>, and the SNMPv2-MIB <xref target="RFC3418"></xref>. These are
         not needed to implement the SNMP-TSM-MIB.</t>

        <section title="MIB Modules Required for IMPORTS">
          <t>The following MIB module imports items from <xref
          target="RFC2578"></xref>,  <xref target="RFC2579"></xref>,   and <xref target="RFC2580"></xref>.</t>
        </section>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="MIB module definition">
      <t></t>

      <figure>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
SNMP-TSM-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN

IMPORTS
    MODULE-IDENTITY, OBJECT-TYPE,
    mib-2, Counter32            
      FROM SNMPv2-SMI
    MODULE-COMPLIANCE, OBJECT-GROUP       
      FROM SNMPv2-CONF
    TruthValue
       FROM SNMPv2-TC
    ;
    
snmpTsmMIB MODULE-IDENTITY
    LAST-UPDATED "200807100000Z"
    ORGANIZATION "ISMS Working Group"
    CONTACT-INFO "WG-EMail:   isms@lists.ietf.org
                  Subscribe:  isms-request@lists.ietf.org

                  Chairs:
                    Juergen Quittek
                    NEC Europe Ltd.
                    Network Laboratories
                    Kurfuersten-Anlage 36
                    69115 Heidelberg
                    Germany
                    +49 6221 90511-15
                    quittek@netlab.nec.de
                    
                    Juergen Schoenwaelder
                    Jacobs University Bremen
                    Campus Ring 1
                    28725 Bremen
                    Germany
                    +49 421 200-3587
                    j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de
                     
                  Editor:
                    David Harrington
                    Huawei Technologies USA
                    1700 Alma Dr.
                    Plano TX 75075
                    USA
                    +1 603-436-8634
                    ietfdbh@comcast.net

	            Wes Hardaker
	            Sparta, Inc.
	            P.O. Box 382
	            Davis, CA  95617
	            USA
	            +1 530 792 1913
	            ietf@hardakers.net
                 "
    DESCRIPTION "The Transport Security Model MIB

                 In keeping with the RFC 3411 design decisions 
                 to use self-contained documents, the RFC which
                 contains the definition of this MIB module also
                 includes the elements of procedure which are 
                 needed for processing the Transport Security
                 Model for SNMP. These MIB objects 
                 SHOULD NOT be modified via other subsystems
                 or models defined in other document.. 
                 This allows the Transport Security Model 
                 for SNMP to be designed and documented as 
                 independent and self- contained, having no 
                 direct impact on other modules, and this 
                 allows this module to be upgraded and 
                 supplemented as the need arises, and to 
                 move along the standards track on different 
                 time-lines from other modules.

                 Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008). This
                 version of this MIB module is part of RFC XXXX;
                 see the RFC itself for full legal notices.
-- NOTE to RFC editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number
--                     for this document and remove this note
                "

    REVISION    "200807100000Z"         
    DESCRIPTION "The initial version, published in RFC XXXX.
-- NOTE to RFC editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number
--                     for this document and remove this note
                "

    ::= { mib-2 xxxx }
-- RFC Ed.: replace xxxx with IANA-assigned number and
--          remove this note
  
-- ---------------------------------------------------------- --
-- subtrees in the SNMP-TSM-MIB
-- ---------------------------------------------------------- --

snmpTsmNotifications OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { snmpTsmMIB 0 }
snmpTsmMIBObjects    OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { snmpTsmMIB 1 }
snmpTsmConformance   OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { snmpTsmMIB 2 }

-- -------------------------------------------------------------
-- Objects
-- -------------------------------------------------------------

-- Statistics for the Transport Security Model 


snmpTsmStats         OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { snmpTsmMIBObjects 1 }

snmpTsmInvalidCaches OBJECT-TYPE
    SYNTAX       Counter32
    MAX-ACCESS   read-only
    STATUS       current
    DESCRIPTION "The number of incoming messages dropped because the 
                 tmStateReference referred to an invalid cache.
                "
    ::= { snmpTsmStats 1 }

snmpTsmInadequateSecurityLevels OBJECT-TYPE
    SYNTAX       Counter32
    MAX-ACCESS   read-only
    STATUS       current
    DESCRIPTION "The number of incoming messages dropped because
                 the securityLevel asserted by the transport model was 
                 less than the securityLevel requested by the 
                 application.
                "
    ::= { snmpTsmStats 2 }
    
snmpTsmUnknownPrefixes OBJECT-TYPE
    SYNTAX       Counter32
    MAX-ACCESS   read-only
    STATUS       current
    DESCRIPTION "The number of messages dropped because
                 snmpTsmConfigurationUsePrefix was set to true and
                 there is no known prefix for the specified transport
                 domain.
                "
    ::= { snmpTsmStats 3 }

snmpTsmInvalidPrefixes OBJECT-TYPE
    SYNTAX       Counter32
    MAX-ACCESS   read-only
    STATUS       current
    DESCRIPTION "The number of messages dropped because
                 the securityName associated with an outgoing message
                 did not contain a valid transport domain prefix.
                "
    ::= { snmpTsmStats 4 }
     
-- -------------------------------------------------------------
-- Configuration
-- -------------------------------------------------------------

-- Configuration for the Transport Security Model 


snmpTsmConfiguration   OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { snmpTsmMIBObjects 2 }

snmpTsmConfigurationUsePrefix OBJECT-TYPE
    SYNTAX      TruthValue
    MAX-ACCESS  read-write
    STATUS      current
    DESCRIPTION "If this object is set to true then securityNames
                 passing to and from the application are expected to
                 contain a transport domain specific prefix. If this
                 object is set to true then a domain specific prefix
                 will be added by the TSM to the securityName for
                 incoming messages and removed from the securityName
                 when processing outgoing messages. Transport domains 
                 and prefixes are maintained in a registry by IANA.
                 This object SHOULD persist across system reboots.
                "
    DEFVAL { false }
    ::= { snmpTsmConfiguration 1 }     

-- -------------------------------------------------------------
-- snmpTsmMIB - Conformance Information
-- -------------------------------------------------------------

snmpTsmCompliances OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { snmpTsmConformance 1 }

snmpTsmGroups      OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { snmpTsmConformance 2 }

-- -------------------------------------------------------------
-- Compliance statements
-- -------------------------------------------------------------

snmpTsmCompliance MODULE-COMPLIANCE
    STATUS      current
    DESCRIPTION "The compliance statement for SNMP engines that support 
                 the SNMP-TSM-MIB
                "
    MODULE
        MANDATORY-GROUPS { snmpTsmGroup }
    ::= { snmpTsmCompliances 1 }

-- -------------------------------------------------------------
-- Units of conformance
-- -------------------------------------------------------------  
snmpTsmGroup OBJECT-GROUP
    OBJECTS {
        snmpTsmInvalidCaches,
        snmpTsmInadequateSecurityLevels,
        snmpTsmUnknownPrefixes,
        snmpTsmInvalidPrefixes,
        snmpTsmConfigurationUsePrefix
    }
    STATUS      current
    DESCRIPTION "A collection of objects for maintaining 
                 information of an SNMP engine which implements 
                 the SNMP Transport Security Model.
                "

    ::= { snmpTsmGroups 2 }
  

END
  
  ]]></artwork>
      </figure>
    </section>

    <!---->

    <!-- 	***************************************************** 	-->

    <section title="Security Considerations">
      <t>This document describes a Security Model, compatible with
      the RFC3411 architecture, that permits SNMP to utilize
      security services provided through an SNMP Transport Model. The
      Transport Security Model relies on Transport Models for mutual
      authentication, binding of keys, confidentiality and integrity. </t>

      <t>The Transport Security Model relies on secure Transport Models to
      provide an authenticated principal identifier and an assertion of 
      whether authentication and privacy are used during transport. This 
      Security Model SHOULD always be used with Transport
      Models that provide adequate security, but "adequate security" is a 
      configuration and/or 
      run-time decision of the operator or management application. The security 
      threats and how these threats are mitigated
      should be covered in detail in the specifications of the
      Transport Models and the underlying secure transports.</t>
      
      <t>An authenticated principal identifier (securityName) is used in SNMP 
      applications, for purposes such as access control, notification 
      generation, and proxy forwarding. This security model supports multiple transport models. 
      Operators might judge some transports to be more secure than others, 
      so this security model can be configured to prepend a prefix to 
      the securityName to indicate the transport model used to authenticate the
      principal. Operators can use the prefixed securityName when making 
      application decisions about levels of access.</t>

      <section title="MIB module security">
        
      <t>There are a number of management objects defined in this MIB module
      with a MAX-ACCESS clause of read-write and/or read-create. Such objects
      may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments.
      The support for SET operations in a non-secure environment without
      proper protection can have a negative effect on network operations.
      These are the tables and objects and their
      sensitivity/vulnerability:</t>

      <t><list style="symbols">
          <t>The snmpTsmConfigurationUsePrefix object could be
          modified, creating a denial of service or authorizing
          SNMP messages that would not have previously been authorized
          by an Access Control Model (e.g. the VACM).</t>
        </list></t>

        <t>Some of the readable objects in this MIB module (i.e., objects with
        a MAX-ACCESS other than not-accessible) may be considered sensitive or
        vulnerable in some network environments. It is thus important to
        control even GET and/or NOTIFY access to these objects and possibly to
        even encrypt the values of these objects when sending them over the
        network via SNMP. These are the tables and objects and their
        sensitivity/vulnerability: <list style="symbols">

            <t>All the counters in this module refer to configuration errors and do not expose sensitive information.</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>SNMP versions prior to SNMPv3 did not include adequate security.
        Even if the network itself is secure (for example by using IPsec),
        even then, there is no control as to who on the secure network is
        allowed to access and GET/SET (read/change/create/delete) the objects
        in this MIB module.</t>

        <t>It is RECOMMENDED that implementers consider the security features
        as provided by the SNMPv3 framework (see <xref
        target="RFC3410"></xref> section 8), including full support for the
        USM and Transport Security Model cryptographic mechanisms (for
        authentication and privacy).</t>

        <t>Further, deployment of SNMP versions prior to SNMPv3 is NOT
        RECOMMENDED. Instead, it is RECOMMENDED to deploy SNMPv3 and to enable
        cryptographic security. It is then a customer/operator responsibility
        to ensure that the SNMP entity giving access to an instance of this
        MIB module is properly configured to give access to the objects only
        to those principals (users) that have legitimate rights to indeed GET
        or SET (change/create/delete) them.</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <!-- 	***************************************************** 	-->

    <section title="IANA Considerations">
      <t>IANA is requested to assign: <list style="numbers">
          <t>an SMI number under mib-2, for the MIB module in this
          document,</t>

          <t>a value, preferably 4, to identify the Transport Security Model,
          in the Security Models registry at
          http://www.iana.org/assignments/snmp-number-spaces. This should
          result in the following table of values:</t>
        </list></t>

      <figure>
        <artwork><![CDATA[Value   Description                         References
-----   -----------                         ----------
  0     reserved for 'any'                  [RFC3411]
  1     reserved for SNMPv1                 [RFC3411]
  2     reserved for SNMPv2c                [RFC3411]
  3     User-Based Security Model (USM)     [RFC3411]
  YY    Transport Security Model (TSM)      [RFCXXXX]

-- NOTE to RFC editor: replace XXXX with actual RFC number
--                     for this document and remove this note
-- NOTE to RFC editor: replace YY with actual IANA-assigned number, 
                       throughout this document and remove this note.
]]></artwork>
      </figure>
    </section>

    <!-- 	***************************************************** 	-->
    
        <section title="Acknowledgements">
      <t>The editors would like to thank Jeffrey Hutzelman for sharing his SSH
      insights, and Dave Shield for an outstanding job wordsmithing
      the existing document to improve organization and clarity.</t>

      <t>Additionally, helpful document reviews were received from:
      Juergen Schoenwaelder.</t>
    </section>
    
  </middle>

  <back>
    <references title="Normative References">
      &rfc2119;

      &rfc2578;

      &rfc2579;

      &rfc2580;

      &rfc3411;

      &rfc3412;

      &rfc3413;

      &I-D.ietf-isms-tmsm;
    </references>

    <references title="Informative References">
      &rfc3410;

      &rfc3414;
      &rfc3415;
      &rfc3418;      
      &rfc3584;
    </references>

    <section title="Notification Tables Configuration">
      <t>The SNMP-TARGET-MIB and SNMP-NOTIFICATION-MIB <xref
      target="RFC3413"></xref> are used to configure notification originators
      with the destinations to which notifications should be sent.</t>

      <t>Most of the configuration is security-model-independent and
      transport-model-independent.</t>

      <t>The values we will use in the examples for the five model-independent
      security and transport parameters are: <list>
          <t>transportDomain = snmpSSHDomain</t>

          <t>transportAddress = 192.0.2.1:162</t>

          <t>securityModel = Transport Security Model</t>

          <t>securityName = sampleUser</t>

          <t>securityLevel = authPriv</t>
        </list></t>

      <t>The following example will configure the Notification Originator to
      send informs to a Notification Receiver at host 192.0.2.1 port 162 using
      the securityName "sampleUser". The columns marked with a "*" are the
      items that are Security Model or Transport Model specific.</t>

      <t>The configuration for the "sampleUser" settings in the
      SNMP-VIEW-BASED-ACM-MIB objects are not shown here for brevity. First we
      configure which type of notification should be sent for this taglist
      (toCRTag). In this example, we choose to send an Inform.</t>

      <figure>
        <artwork><![CDATA[  snmpNotifyTable row:
       snmpNotifyName                 CRNotif
       snmpNotifyTag                  toCRTag 
       snmpNotifyType                 inform
       snmpNotifyStorageType          nonVolatile
       snmpNotifyColumnStatus         createAndGo]]></artwork>
      </figure>

      <t>Then we configure a transport address to which notifications
      associated with this taglist should be sent, and we specify which
      snmpTargetParamsEntry should be used (toCR) when sending to this
      transport address.</t>

      <figure>
        <artwork><![CDATA[       snmpTargetAddrTable row:
          snmpTargetAddrName              toCRAddr 
      *   snmpTargetAddrTDomain           snmpSSHDomain    
          snmpTargetAddrTAddress          192.0.2.1:162     
          snmpTargetAddrTimeout           1500           
          snmpTargetAddrRetryCount        3       
          snmpTargetAddrTagList           toCRTag         
          snmpTargetAddrParams            toCR   (must match below) 
          snmpTargetAddrStorageType       nonVolatile
          snmpTargetAddrColumnStatus      createAndGo 

]]></artwork>
      </figure>

      <t>Then we configure which principal at the host should receive the
      notifications associated with this taglist. Here we choose "sampleUser",
      who uses the Transport Security Model.</t>

      <figure>
        <artwork><![CDATA[      snmpTargetParamsTable row:
          snmpTargetParamsName            toCR       
          snmpTargetParamsMPModel         SNMPv3     
      *   snmpTargetParamsSecurityModel   TransportSecurityModel       
          snmpTargetParamsSecurityName    "sampleUser"    
          snmpTargetParamsSecurityLevel   authPriv   
          snmpTargetParamsStorageType     nonVolatile
          snmpTargetParamsRowStatus       createAndGo

]]></artwork>
      </figure>

      <t></t>

      <section title="Transport Security Model Processing for Notifications">
        <t>The Transport Security Model is called using the
        generateRequestMsg() ASI, with the following parameters (* are from
        the above tables):</t>

        <figure>
          <artwork><![CDATA[
  statusInformation =                -- success or errorIndication
        generateRequestMsg(
        IN   messageProcessingModel  -- *snmpTargetParamsMPModel
        IN   globalData              -- message header, admin data
        IN   maxMessageSize          -- of the sending SNMP entity
        IN   transportDomain         -- *snmpTargetAddrTDomain
        IN   transportAddress        -- *snmpTargetAddrTAddress
        IN   securityModel           -- *snmpTargetParamsSecurityModel
        IN   securityEngineID        -- immaterial; TSM will ignore.
        IN   securityName            -- snmpTargetParamsSecurityName
        IN   securityLevel           -- *snmpTargetParamsSecurityLevel
        IN   scopedPDU               -- message (plaintext) payload
        OUT  securityParameters      -- filled in by Security Module
        OUT  wholeMsg                -- complete generated message
        OUT  wholeMsgLength          -- length of generated message
        OUT  tmStateReference        -- reference to transport info        
             )
 ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>The Transport Security Model will determine the Transport Model
        based on the snmpTargetAddrTDomain. The selected Transport Model will
        select the appropriate transport connection using the
        snmpTargetAddrTAddress, snmpTargetParamsSecurityName, and
        snmpTargetParamsSecurityLevel.</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="Processing Differences between USM and Secure Transport">
      <t>USM and secure transports differ in the processing order and
      responsibilities within the RFC3411 architecture. While the steps are
      the same, they occur in a different order, and may be done by different
      subsystems. The following lists illustrate the difference in the flow
      and the responsibility for different processing steps for incoming
      messages when using USM and when using a secure transport. (These lists are simplified for illustrative purposes, and do not
      represent all details of processing. Transport Models must provide the
      detailed elements of procedure.)</t>

      <t>With USM, SNMPv1, and SNMPv2c Security Models, security processing starts when
      the Message Processing Model decodes portions of the ASN.1 message to
      extract header fields that are used to determine which Security Model should process 
      the message to perform
      authentication, decryption, timeliness checking, integrity checking, and
      translation of parameters to model-independent parameters. By comparison, a secure
      transport performs those security functions on the message, before the
      ASN.1 is decoded.</t>

      <t>Step 6 cannot occur until after decryption occurs. Step 6 and beyond
      are the same for USM and a secure transport.</t>

      <section title="USM and the RFC3411 Architecture">
        <t><list style="hanging">
            <t hangText="1)">decode the ASN.1 header (Message Processing
            Model)</t>

            <t hangText="2)">determine the SNMP Security Model and parameters
            (Message Processing Model)</t>

            <t hangText="3)">verify securityLevel. [Security Model]</t>

            <t hangText="4)">translate parameters to model-independent
            parameters (Security Model)</t>

            <t hangText="5)">authenticate the principal, check message
            integrity and timeliness, and decrypt the message. [Security
            Model]</t>

            <t hangText="6)">determine the pduType in the decrypted portions
            (Message Processing Model), and</t>

            <t hangText="7)">pass on the decrypted portions with
            model-independent parameters.</t>
          </list></t>
      </section>

      <section title="Transport Subsystem and the RFC3411 Architecture">
        <t><list style="hanging">
            <t hangText="1)">authenticate the principal, check integrity and
            timeliness of the message, and decrypt the message. [Transport
            Model]</t>

            <t hangText="2)">translate parameters to model-independent
            parameters (Transport Model)</t>

            <t hangText="3)">decode the ASN.1 header (Message Processing
            Model)</t>

            <t hangText="4)">determine the SNMP Security Model and parameters
            (Message Processing Model)</t>

            <t hangText="5)">verify securityLevel [Security Model]</t>

            <t hangText="6)">determine the pduType in the decrypted portions
            (Message Processing Model), and</t>

            <t hangText="7)">pass on the decrypted portions with
            model-independent security parameters</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>If a message is secured using a secure transport layer, then the
        Transport Model should provide the translation from the authenticated
        identity (e.g., an SSH user name) to a human-friendly identifier in step 2.
        The security model will provide a mapping from that identifier to a model-independent
        securityName.</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="Open Issues">
      <t><list>
			<t></t>
        </list></t>
    </section>

    <section title="Change Log">
      <t>From -09- to -10-</t>
      <t>
	<list style="empty">
        <t>snmpTsmInvalidPrefix -> snmpTsmInvalidPrefixes</t>
        <t>Improvements to the prefix handling text in the EOP</t>
        <t>Removed transform selection</t>
        <t>Removed translation table</t>
        <t>Removed option to disable transports.</t>
        <t>Removed references to the LCD.</t>
        <t>Removed modifications to the "Cached Information" section to keep
         this consistent with other ISMS documents.</t>
         <t>Eliminated most "Relationship to Other MIB modules" text.</t>
         <t>Significant text cleanup</t>      
	</list>
      </t>

      <t>From -08- to -09-</t>
      <t>
	<list style="empty">
	  <t>Added the transport domain specific prefix
	  adding/removing support as agreed to within the ISMS WG.
	  The implementation is a bit different than what was
	  originally discussed and is now housed entirely within this
	  document and requires only a string allocation in the TM
	  documents.  In the end this form greatly reduced the
	  documentation and procedure complexity in most
	  documents.</t>
	  <t>Added the snmpTsmConfigurationUsePrefix scalar.</t>
	  <t>Removed the snmpTsmLCDTable since it is no longer needed.</t>
	  <t>Removed the snmpTsmLCDDomainTable since it is not needed
	  with the prefix addition replaced the functionality.</t>
	</list>
      </t>

          <t>From -07- to -08-</t>

      <t><list style="empty">
          <t>Added tables to the MIB module to define a Transport Security
          Model-specific LCD, and updated the Elements of Procedure. This was 
          because references to an abstract LCD sort of owned by both the
          security model and the transport model were found confusing.</t>
          
          <t>Realized we referred to the MIB module in text as 
          SNMP-TRANSPORT-SM-MIB, but SNMP-TSM-MIB in the module. 
          Changed all occurrences of SNMP-TRANSPORT-SM-MIB to 
          SNMP-TSM-MIB, following RFC4181 guidelines for naming.</t>
          
          <t>Updated Security Considerations to warn about writable objects, and 
          added the new counter to the readable objects list.</t>
          
          <t>Changed snmpTsmLCDName to snmpTsmLCDTmSecurityName</t>

        </list></t>
        
      <t>From -05- to -06-</t>

      <t><list style="empty">
          <t>Fixed a bunch of editorial nits</t>

          <t>Fixed the note about terminology consistent with SNMPv3.</t>

          <t>Updated MIB assignment to by rfc4181 compatible</t>

          <t>Replaced tmSameSession with tmSameSecurity to eliminate
          session-matching from the security model.</t>

          <t>Eliminated all reference to the LCD from the Transport Security
          Model; the LCD is now TM-specific.</t>

          <t>Added tmTransportSecurityLevel and tmRequestedSecurityLevel to
          clarify incoming versus outgoing</t>
        </list></t>

      <t>From -04- to -05-</t>

      <t><list style="empty">
          <t>Removed check for empty securityParameters for incoming
          messages</t>

          <t>Added a note about terminology, for consistency with SNMPv3
          rather than with RFC2828.</t>
        </list></t>

      <t>From -03- to -04-</t>

      <t><list style="empty">
          <t>Editorial changes requested by Tom Petch, to clarify behavior
          with SNMPv1/v2c</t>

          <t>Added early discussion of how TSM fits into the architecture to
          clarify behavior when RFC3584 security models are co-resident.</t>

          <t>Editorial changes requested by Bert Wijnen, to eliminate
          version-specific discussions.</t>

          <t>Removed sections on version-specific message formats.</t>

          <t>Removed discussion of SNMPv3 in Motivation section.</t>

          <t>Added discussion of request/response session matching.</t>
        </list></t>

      <t>From -02- to -03-</t>

      <t><list style="empty">
          <t>Editorial changes suggested by Juergen Schoenwaelder</t>

          <t>Capitalized Transport Models, Security Models, and Message
          Processing Models, to be consistent with RFC341x conventions.</t>

          <t>Eliminated some text that duplicated RFC3412, especially in
          Elements of Procedure.</t>

          <t>Changed the encoding of msgSecurityParameters</t>

          <t>Marked the (NEW) fields added to existing ASIs</t>

          <t>Modified text intro discussing relationships to other MIB
          modules.</t>
        </list></t>

      <t>From -01- to -02-</t>

      <t><list style="empty">
          <t>Changed transportSecurityModel(4) to transportSecurityModel(YY),
          waiting for assignment</t>

          <t>cleaned up elements of procedure [todo]s</t>

          <t>use the same errorIndication as USM for
          unsupportedSecurityLevel</t>

          <t>fixed syntax of tsmInadequateSecurity counter</t>

          <t>changed the "can and will use" the same security parameters to
          "can use", to allow responses that have different security
          parameters than the request.</t>

          <t>removed "Relationship to the SNMP-FRAMEWORK-MIB"</t>

          <t>cleaned up "MIB Modules Required for IMPORTS"</t>

          <t></t>
        </list>From -00- to -01-</t>

      <t><list>
          <t>made the Transport Model not know anything about the Security
          Model.</t>

          <t>modified the elements of procedure sections, given the
          implications of this change.</t>

          <t>simplified elements of procedure, removing most info specified in
          architecture/subsystem definitions.</t>

          <t>rethought the coexistence section</t>

          <t>noted the implications of the Transport Security Model on
          isAccessAllowed()</t>

          <t>modified all text related to the LCD.</t>

          <t>removed most of the MIB (now the TSM has no configuration
          parameters).</t>

          <t>added counters needed to support elements of procedure</t>

          <t>renamed MIB module, and registered under snmpModules</t>

          <t>updated IANA and Security Considerations</t>

          <t>updated references.</t>

          <t>modified the notification configurations.</t>
        </list></t>

      <t>From SSHSM-04- to Transport-security-model-00</t>

      <t><list style="empty">
          <t>added tsmUserTable</t>

          <t>updated Appendix - Notification Tables Configuration</t>

          <t>remove open/closed issue appendices</t>

          <t>changed tmSessionReference to tmStateReference</t>

          <t></t>
        </list></t>
    </section>
  </back>
</rfc>
<!-- Local Variables:                                           -->
<!-- compile-command: "xml2rfc snmptls.xml"                     -->
<!-- ispell-local-dictionary: "american"                        -->
<!-- sgml-declaration: "/usr/lib/sgml/declaration/xml.decl"     -->
<!-- sgml-omittag:nil                                           -->
<!-- sgml-shorttag:t                                            -->
<!-- sgml-namecase-general:t                                    -->
<!-- sgml-minimize-attributes:nil                               -->
<!-- sgml-always-quote-attributes:t                             -->
<!-- sgml-indent-step:2                                         -->
<!-- sgml-indent-data:t                                         -->
<!-- sgml-parent-document:nil                                   -->
<!-- sgml-exposed-tags:nil                                      -->
<!-- sgml-local-catalogs:nil                                    -->
<!-- sgml-local-ecat-files:nil                                  -->
<!-- End:                                                       -->
