| TOC |
|
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as “work in progress.”
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on June 11, 2009.
The existing IMAP URL specification (RFC5092) lists several <access> identifiers and <access> identifier prefixes, that can be used to restrict access to URLAUTH-generated URLs. However, these identifiers do not provide facilities for new services such as streaming. This document proposes a set of new <access> identifiers as well as an IANA mechanism to register new <access> identifiers for future applications.
1.
Introduction
2.
Conventions Used in this Document
3.
Additional Authorized Access Identifiers
3.1.
Existing Access Identifiers
3.2.
Requirement for Additional Access Identifiers
3.3.
Additional Access Identifier Specification
3.4.
Defining an access identifier
for Streaming
4.
Formal Syntax
5.
Acknowledgements
6.
IANA Considerations
6.1.
Access Identifier Registration Template
6.2.
Stream Application
Registration
7.
Security Considerations
8.
References
8.1.
Normative References
8.2.
Informative References
§
Author's Address
§
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements
| TOC |
The IMAP URL specification [RFC5092] (Melnikov, A. and C. Newman, “IMAP URL Scheme,” November 2007.) provides a way to carry authorization information in IMAP URLs. Several authorization <access> identifiers are specified in the document, which allow URLAUTH-authorized URLs to be used only by anonymous users, authenticated users, or message submission entities. However there is no mechanism defined to create new <access> identifiers, and overloading the existing mechanisms has security as well as administrative implications.
This document describes a new <access> identifier "stream", to be used by message streaming entities (as described in [STREAMING] (Cook, N., “Streaming Internet Messaging Attachments,” Dec 2008.)), and defines an IANA registration template, which can be used to register new <access> identifiers for future applications.
| TOC |
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 RFC 2119 (Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” March 1997.) [RFC2119].
In examples, "C:" and "S:" indicate lines sent by the client and server respectively. If a single "C:" or "S:" label applies to multiple lines, then some of the line breaks between those lines are for editorial clarity only and may not be part of the actual protocol exchange.
| TOC |
| TOC |
The IMAP URL specification, IMAPURL (Melnikov, A. and C. Newman, “IMAP URL Scheme,” November 2007.) [RFC5092], specifies the following authorized <access> identifiers:
Additionally the following <access> identifier prefixes are defined:
| TOC |
The existing <access> identifiers are suitable for user-based authorization, but only the "submit+" <access> identifier prefix is suitable for entities acting on behalf of a users, which is required for new services such as streaming (Cook, N., “Streaming Internet Messaging Attachments,” Dec 2008.) [STREAMING].
The "submit+" <access> identifier prefix is not suitable for use as a general mechanism to grant access to entities acting on behalf of users, for reasons that include:
| TOC |
The previous section established that additional access identifiers are required to support applications, such as streaming (Cook, N., “Streaming Internet Messaging Attachments,” Dec 2008.) [STREAMING], that require entities to retrieve URLAUTH URLs on behalf of users. This section describes the scope and meaning of any additional <access> identifiers that are created.
Additional <access> identifiers MUST take one of two forms (Section 4 (Formal Syntax) gives the formal ABNF syntax):
In both cases, the semantics are the same as those for "submit+", i.e. the <access> identifier or <access> identifier prefix (which MUST be followed by a userid), indicates that only a userid authorized as an application entity for the specified application is permitted to use this URL. The IMAP server SHALL NOT validate any specified userid but MUST validate that the IMAP session has an authorization identity that is authorized as an application entity for the specified application. The application entity itself MAY choose to perform validation on any specified userid before attempting to retrieve the URL.
The authorization granted by any <access> identifiers used as described above is self-describing, and so requires the IMAP server to provide an extensible mechanism for associating userids with new applications. For example, imgine a new application "foo" is created, which requires application entities to retrieve URLs on behalf of users. In this case, the IMAP server would need to provide a way to register a new application "foo", and to associate the set of userids to be used by those entities with the application "foo". Any attempt to retrieve URLs containing the <access> identifier "foo" would be be checked for authorization against the list of userids associated with the application "foo".
Section 6 (IANA Considerations) provides the template required to register new <access> identifiers or prefixes with IANA.
| TOC |
One application that makes use of URLAUTH-authorized URLs is that of streaming multimedia files received as internet messaging attachments. This application is described in [STREAMING] (Cook, N., “Streaming Internet Messaging Attachments,” Dec 2008.).
See Section 6.2 (Stream Application Registration) for the IANA registration template for the "stream" <access> identifier.
| TOC |
The following syntax specification uses the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) notation as specified in [RFC5234] (Crocker, D. and P. Overell, “Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF,” January 2008.).
Except as noted otherwise, all alphabetic characters are case-insensitive. The use of upper or lower case characters to define token strings is for editorial clarity only. Implementations MUST accept these strings in a case-insensitive fashion.
The ABNF specified below updates and replaces the formal syntax of <access> identifier as defined in IMAP URL (Melnikov, A. and C. Newman, “IMAP URL Scheme,” November 2007.) [RFC5092].
application = *ALPHA access = ("submit+" enc-user) / ("user+" enc-user) / "authuser" / "anonymous" / application / (application "+" enc-user)
| TOC |
This document was inspired by discussions in the Lemonade Working Group.
| TOC |
Access identifiers and prefixes MUST be specified in a standards track or IESG approved experimental RFC.
| TOC |
To: iana@iana.org
Subject: IMAP URL Access Identifier Registration
Type: [Either "access identifier" or
"access prefix"]
Application: [Name of the application, e.g. "stream"]
Description: [A description of the application and its use
of IMAP URLs]
RFC Number: [Number of the RFC that the application was
defined in ]
Contact: [email and/or physical address to contact for
additional information]
| TOC |
To: iana@iana.org
Subject: IMAP URL Access Identifier Registration
Type: access identifier
Application: stream
Description: Used by SIP Media Servers to retrieve
attachments for streaming to email
clients
RFC Number: This RFC
Contact: Neil Cook mailto:neil.cook@noware.co.uk
| TOC |
The extension to <access> identifiers specified in this document provides a mechanism for extending the semantics of the "submit+" <access> prefix to arbitrary applications. The use of such additional <access> identifiers and prefixes is primarily for security purposes, i.e. to prevent the overloading of "submit+" as a generic mechanism to allow entities to retrieve IMAP URLs on behalf of userids. However, the security implications are identical to that discussed in Section 10.1 of IMAPURL (Melnikov, A. and C. Newman, “IMAP URL Scheme,” November 2007.) [RFC5092].
| TOC |
| TOC |
| [RFC2119] | Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997 (TXT, HTML, XML). |
| [RFC5092] | Melnikov, A. and C. Newman, “IMAP URL Scheme,” RFC 5092, November 2007 (TXT). |
| [RFC5234] | Crocker, D. and P. Overell, “Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF,” STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008 (TXT). |
| TOC |
| [STREAMING] | Cook, N., “Streaming Internet Messaging Attachments,” draft-ietf-lemonade-streaming-08.txt (Work in Progress) , Dec 2008. |
| TOC |
| Neil L Cook | |
| Cloudmark | |
| Email: | neil.cook@noware.co.uk |
| TOC |
Copyright © The IETF Trust (2008).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an “AS IS” basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org.