<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?> <!DOCTYPE rfc [ <!ENTITY nbsp " "> <!ENTITY zwsp "​"> <!ENTITY nbhy "‑"> <!ENTITY wj "⁠"> ]><?rfc sortrefs="yes"?> <?rfc subcompact="no"?> <?rfc symrefs="yes"?> <?rfc toc="yes"?> <?rfc tocdepth="3"?> <?rfc compact="yes"?> <?rfc subcompact="no"?><rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" category="std" docName="draft-ietf-sidrops-rrdp-desynchronization-04" number="9697" ipr="trust200902" xml:lang="en" sortRefs="true" symRefs="true" tocInclude="true" tocDepth="3" submissionType="IETF" consensus="true" updates="8182" obsoletes="" version="3"> <front><title>Detecting<title abbrev="Detecting RRDP Session Desynchronization">Detecting RPKI Repository Delta Protocol (RRDP) Session Desynchronization</title> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9697"/> <author fullname="Job Snijders" initials="J." surname="Snijders"> <organization>Fastly</organization> <address> <postal><street/> <code/><city>Amsterdam</city> <country>Netherlands</country> </postal> <email>job@fastly.com</email> </address> </author> <author fullname="Ties de Kock" initials="T." surname="de Kock"> <organization>RIPE NCC</organization> <address> <postal> <city>Amsterdam</city> <country>Netherlands</country> </postal> <email>tdekock@ripe.net</email> </address> </author> <date/> <area>ops</area> <workgroup>SIDROPS</workgroup>month="December" year="2024"/> <area>OPS</area> <workgroup>sidrops</workgroup> <keyword>desynchronization</keyword> <keyword>RPKI</keyword> <keyword>RRDP</keyword> <abstract> <t> This document describes an approach for Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Relying Parties to detect a particular form of RPKI Repository Delta Protocol (RRDP) session desynchronization and how to recover. This document updates RFC 8182. </t> </abstract> </front> <middle> <section anchor="intro"> <name>Introduction</name> <t> The Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Repository Delta Protocol (RRDP) <xref target="RFC8182"/> is a one-way synchronization protocol for distributing RPKI data in the form of <em>differences</em> (deltas) between sequential repository states. Relying Parties (RPs) apply a contiguous chain of deltas to synchronize their local copy of the repository with the current state of the remote Repository Server. Delta files for any given session_id and serial number are expected to contain an immutable record of the state of the Repository Server at that given point in time, but this is not always the case. </t> <t> This document describes an approach forRelying Parties (RPs)RPs to detect a form of RRDP session desynchronization where the hash of a delta for a given serial number and session_id have mutated from the previous Update Notification File and how to recover. </t> <section anchor="requirements"> <name>Requirements Language</name> <t> The key words "<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>REQUIRED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>NOT RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>", and "<bcp14>OPTIONAL</bcp14>" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here. </t> </section> </section> <section anchor="immutability"> <name>Immutability of RRDPfiles</name>Files</name> <t> <xref target="RFC8182" section="3.1"/> describes how discrete publication events such as the addition, modification, or deletion of one or more repository objects <em>can</em> be communicated as immutable files, highlighting advantages for publishers, such as the ability topre-calculateprecalculate files and make use of caching infrastructure. </t> <t>WhileEven though the global RPKI is understood to present a loosely consistentview, dependingview that depends ontiming, updating, fetchingthe cache's timing of updates (see <xref target="RFC7115" section="6"/>), different caches having different data for the same RRDP session at the same serial violates the principle of least astonishment. </t> <t> If an RRDP server over time serves differing data for a given session_id and serial number, distinct RP instances (depending on the moment they connected to the RRDP server) would end up with divergent local repositories. Comparing only the server-provided session_id and latest serial number across distinct RP instances would not bring such divergence to light. </t> <t> The RRDP specification <xref target="RFC8182"/>specification does alludealludes to immutability being a property of RRDP files, but it doesn't make it clear that immutability is an absolute requirement for the RRDPprotocolto work well. </t> </section> <section anchor="detection"> <name>Detection of Desynchronization</name> <t> Relying Parties can implement a mechanism to keep a record of the serial and hash attribute values in delta elements of the previous successful fetch of an Update Notification File. Then, after fetching a new Update Notification File, the Relying Party should compare if the serial and hash values of previously seen serials match those in the newly fetched file. If any differences are detected, this means that the Delta files were unexpectedly mutated, and the RP should proceed to <xref target="recovery"/>. </t> <section anchor="example"> <name>Example</name> <t> This section contains two versions of an Update Notification File to demonstrate an unexpected mutation. The initial Update Notification File is as follows: </t><sourcecode> <![CDATA[<figure> <sourcecode type="xml"><![CDATA[ <notification xmlns="http://www.ripe.net/rpki/rrdp" version="1" session_id="fe528335-db5f-48b2-be7e-bf0992d0b5ec" serial="1774"> <snapshot uri="https://rrdp.example.net/1774/snapshot.xml"hash="4b5f27b099737b8bf288a33796bfe825fb2014a69fd6aa99080380299952f2e2"/>hash= "4b5f27b099737b8bf288a33796bfe825fb2014a69fd6aa99080380299952f2e2" /> <delta serial="1774"hash="effac94afd30bbf1cd6e180e7f445a4d4653cb4c91068fa9e7b669d49b5aaa00"uri="https://rrdp.example.net/1774/delta.xml" hash= "effac94afd30bbf1cd6e180e7f445a4d4653cb4c91068fa9e7b669d49b5aaa00" /> <delta serial="1773"hash="731169254dd5de0ede94ba6999bda63b0fae9880873a3710e87a71bafb64761a"uri="https://rrdp.example.net/1773/delta.xml" hash= "731169254dd5de0ede94ba6999bda63b0fae9880873a3710e87a71bafb64761a" /> <delta serial="1772"hash="d4087585323fd6b7fd899ebf662ef213c469d39f53839fa6241847f4f6ceb939" uri="https://rrdp.example.net/1772/delta.xmluri="https://rrdp.example.net/1772/delta.xml" hash= "d4087585323fd6b7fd899ebf662ef213c469d39f53839fa6241847f4f6ceb939" /></notification> ]]></notification>]]> </sourcecode> </figure> <t> Based on the above Update Notification File, an RP implementation could record the following state: </t> <figure anchor="state"><sourcecode><sourcecode type=""><![CDATA[ fe528335-db5f-48b2-be7e-bf0992d0b5ec 1774 effac94afd30bbf1cd6e180e7f445a4d4653cb4c91068fa9e7b669d49b5aaa00 1773 731169254dd5de0ede94ba6999bda63b0fae9880873a3710e87a71bafb64761a 1772 d4087585323fd6b7fd899ebf662ef213c469d39f53839fa6241847f4f6ceb939</sourcecode>]]></sourcecode> </figure> <t> A new version of the Update Notification File ispublished,published asfollowing:follows: </t><sourcecode> <![CDATA[<figure> <sourcecode type="xml"><![CDATA[ <notification xmlns="http://www.ripe.net/rpki/rrdp" version="1" session_id="fe528335-db5f-48b2-be7e-bf0992d0b5ec" serial="1775"> <snapshot uri="https://rrdp.example.net/1775/snapshot.xml"hash="cd430c386deacb04bda55301c2aa49f192b529989b739f412aea01c9a77e5389"/>hash= "cd430c386deacb04bda55301c2aa49f192b529989b739f412aea01c9a77e5389" /> <delta serial="1775"hash="d199376e98a9095dbcf14ccd49208b4223a28a1327669f89566475d94b2b08cc" uri="https://rrdp.example.net/1775/delta.xmluri="https://rrdp.example.net/1775/delta.xml" hash= "d199376e98a9095dbcf14ccd49208b4223a28a1327669f89566475d94b2b08cc" /> <delta serial="1774"hash="10ca28480a584105a059f95df5ca8369142fd7c8069380f84ebe613b8b89f0d3"uri="https://rrdp.example.net/1774/delta.xml" hash= "10ca28480a584105a059f95df5ca8369142fd7c8069380f84ebe613b8b89f0d3" /> <delta serial="1773"hash="731169254dd5de0ede94ba6999bda63b0fae9880873a3710e87a71bafb64761a"uri="https://rrdp.example.net/1773/delta.xml" hash= "731169254dd5de0ede94ba6999bda63b0fae9880873a3710e87a71bafb64761a" /></notification> ]]></notification>]]> </sourcecode> </figure> <t> Using its previously recorded state (see <xreftarget="state">state</xref>,target="state" />), the RP can compare the hash values for serials 1773 and 1774. For serial 1774, compared to the earlier version of the Update Notification File, a different hash value is now listed, meaning an unexpected delta mutation occurred. </t> </section> </section> <section anchor="recovery"> <name>RecoveryafterAfter Desynchronization</name> <t> Following the detection of RRDP session desynchronization, in order to return to a synchronized state, RP implementationsSHOULD<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> issue a warning andSHOULD<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> download the latest Snapshot File and process it as described in <xref target="RFC8182"section="3.4.3"/>.section="3.4.3" sectionFormat="of"/>. </t> <t> Seethe<xref target="security"/> for an overview of risks associated with desynchronization. </t> </section> <section anchor="rfc8182"> <name>Changes to RFC 8182</name> <t> The following paragraph is added to <xref target="RFC8182"section="3.4.1"/>section="3.4.1"/>, "Processing the Update Notification File", after the paragraphwhichthat ends "The Relying PartyMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> then download and process the Snapshot File specified in the downloaded Update Notification File as described in Section 3.4.3." </t> <!-- [rfced] As this text would be added to RFC 8182, it would be odd to refer to itself. We updated the text to indicate "Section 3.4.3", where 3.4.3 links to Section 3.4.3 in RFC 8182. Please review and let us know if you have any concerns. Original: | ... The Relying Party | SHOULD then download and process the Snapshot File specified in | the downloaded Update Notification File as described in | Section 3.4.3 of [RFC8182] Current: | ... The Relying Party SHOULD | then download and process the Snapshot File specified in the | downloaded Update Notification File as described in Section 3.4.3. --> <t>NEW</t> <blockquote> <t> If the session_id matches the last known session_id, the Relying PartySHOULD<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> compare whether hash values associated with previously seen files for serials match the hash values of the corresponding serials in the newly fetched Update Notification File. If any differences are detected, this means that files were unexpectedly mutated(See <xref target="I-D.ietf-sidrops-rrdp-desynchronization"/>).(see [RFC9697]). The Relying PartySHOULD<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> then download and process the Snapshot File specified in the downloaded Update Notification File as described in Section <xref target="RFC8182"section="3.4.3"/>section="3.4.3" sectionFormat="bare"/>. </t> </blockquote> </section> <section anchor="security"> <name>Security Considerations</name> <t> Due to the lifetime of RRDP sessions (often measured in months), desynchronization can persist for an extended period if undetected. </t> <t> Caches in a desynchronized state pose a risk by emitting a different set of Validated Payloads than they would otherwise emit with a consistent repository copy. Through the interaction of the desynchronization and the <em>failed fetch</em> mechanism described in <xref target="RFC9286" section="6.6"/>, Relying Parties could spuriously omit Validated Payloads or emit Validated Payloads that the Certification Authority intended to withdraw. As a result, due to the desynchronized state, route decision making processes might consider route announcements intended to be marked valid as "unknown" or "invalid" for an indeterminate period. </t> <t> Missing Validated Payloads negatively impact the ability to validate BGP announcements using mechanisms such as those described in <xref target="RFC6811"/> and <xref target="I-D.ietf-sidrops-aspa-verification"/>. </t> <t> <xref target="RFC9286" section="6.6"/> advises RP implementations to continue to use cached versions of objects, but only until such time as they become stale. By detecting whether the remote Repository Server is in an inconsistent state and then immediately switching to using the latest Snapshot File, RPs increase the probability to successfully replace objects before they become stale. </t> </section> <sectionanchor="iana" title="IANA Considerations">anchor="iana"> <name>IANA Considerations</name> <t>NoThis document has no IANAactions required.actions. </t> </section> </middle> <back> <displayreference target="I-D.ietf-sidrops-aspa-verification" to="ASPA"/> <references> <name>References</name> <references> <name>Normative References</name> <xi:includehref="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml"/>href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml"/> <xi:includehref="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8174.xml"/>href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8174.xml"/> <xi:includehref="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8182.xml"/> <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-sidrops-rrdp-desynchronization" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sidrops-rrdp-desynchronization"> <front> <title>Detecting RRDP Session Desynchronization</title> <author fullname="Job Snijders" initials="J." surname="Snijders"> <organization>Fastly</organization> </author> <author fullname="Ties de Kock" initials="T." surname="de Kock"> <organization>RIPE NCC</organization> </author> <date /> <abstract> <t> This document describes an approach for Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) Relying Parties (RPs) to detect a form of RPKI Repository Delta Protocol (RRDP) session desynchronization where the hash of a Delta for a given serial number and session_id have mutated compared to the previous Update Notification File and how to recover. This document updates RFC 8182. </t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-sidrops-rrdp-desynchronization"/> </reference>href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8182.xml"/> </references> <references> <name>Informative References</name> <xi:includehref="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6811.xml"/>href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6811.xml"/> <xi:includehref="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7115.xml"/>href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7115.xml"/> <xi:includehref="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9286.xml"/>href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9286.xml"/> <!-- [I-D.ietf-sidrops-aspa-verification] IESG State: I-D Exists as of 11/20/24 --> <xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-sidrops-aspa-verification.xml"/><reference anchor="rpki-client" target="https://www.rpki-client.org/"> <front> <title>rpki-client 8.5</title> <author fullname="Claudio Jeker"/> <author fullname="Job Snijders"/> <author fullname="Kristaps Dzonsons"/> <author fullname="Theo Buehler"/> <date month="July" year="2023" /> </front> </reference> <reference anchor="rpki-prover" target="https://github.com/lolepezy/rpki-prover"> <front> <title>rpki-prover 0.9.0</title> <author fullname="Mikhail Puzanov"/> <date month="February" year="2024" /> </front> </reference> <reference anchor="FORT-validator" target="https://github.com/NICMx/FORT-validator/compare/main...draft-spaghetti-sidrops-rrdp-desynchronization"> <front> <title>FORT validator 1.7.0</title> <author fullname="Alberto Leiva"/> <date month="March" year="2024" /> </front> </reference> <reference anchor="Routinator" target="https://github.com/NLnetLabs/routinator/pull/951"> <front> <title>Routinator</title> <author> <organization>NLNet Labs</organization> </author> <date/> </front> </reference></references> </references> <sectionanchor="acknowledgements">anchor="acknowledgements" numbered="false"> <name>Acknowledgements</name><t> During<t>During the hallway track at RIPE 86, <contact fullname="Ties de Kock"/> shared the idea for detecting this particular form of RRDP desynchronization, after which <contact fullname="Claudio Jeker"/>, <contact fullname="Job Snijders"/>, and <contact fullname="Theo Buehler"/> produced an implementation based on rpki-client. Equipped with tooling to detect this particular error condition, in subsequent months it became apparent that unexpected delta mutations in the global RPKI repositories do happen from time totime. </t> <t> Thetime.</t> <t>The authors wish to thank <contact fullname="Theo Buehler"/>, <contact fullname="Mikhail Puzanov"/>, <contact fullname="Alberto Leiva"/>, <contact fullname="Tom Harrison"/>, <contact fullname="Warren Kumari"/>, <contact fullname="Behcet Sarikaya"/>, <contact fullname="Murray Kucherawy"/>, <contact fullname="Éric Vyncke"/>, <contact fullname="Roman Danyliw"/>, <contact fullname="Tim Bruijnzeels"/>, and <contact fullname="Michael Hollyman"/> for their careful review and feedback on thisdocument. </t> </section> <section removeInRFC="true"> <name>Implementation status</name> <t> This section records the status of known implementations of the protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of this Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in RFC 7942. The description of implementations in this section is intended to assist the IETF in its decision processes in progressing drafts to RFCs. Please note that the listing of any individual implementation here does not imply endorsement by the IETF. Furthermore, no effort has been spent to verify the information presented here that was supplied by IETF contributors. This is not intended as, and must not be construed to be, a catalog of available implementations or their features. Readers are advised to note that other implementations may exist. </t> <t> According to RFC 7942, "this will allow reviewers and working groups to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature. It is up to the individual working groups to use this information as they see fit". </t> <ul> <li> OpenBSD <xref target="rpki-client"/> 8.5 and higher </li> <li> Mikhail Puzanov's <xref target="rpki-prover"/> 0.9.0 and higher </li> <li> FORT project's <xref target="FORT-validator"/> 1.7.0 and higher </li> <li> NLnet Labs' <xref target="Routinator"/> main branch </li> </ul>document.</t> </section> </back> </rfc>