<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc [
  <!ENTITY nbsp    "&#160;">
  <!ENTITY zwsp   "&#8203;">
  <!ENTITY nbhy   "&#8209;">
  <!ENTITY wj     "&#8288;">
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="rfc2629.xslt" ?>
<!-- generated by https://github.com/cabo/kramdown-rfc version 1.7.43 (Ruby 3.2.3) -->
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-reddy-ipsecme-ikev2-mtc-landmarks-00" category="std" consensus="true" submissionType="IETF" tocInclude="true" sortRefs="true" symRefs="true" version="3">
  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 3.34.1 -->
  <front>
    <title abbrev="MTC in IKEv2">Merkle Tree Certificates in the Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)</title>
    <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-reddy-ipsecme-ikev2-mtc-landmarks-00"/>
    <author fullname="Tirumaleswar Reddy">
      <organization>Nokia</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <city>Bangalore</city>
          <region>Karnataka</region>
          <country>India</country>
        </postal>
        <email>kondtir@gmail.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Valery Smyslov">
      <organization>ELVIS-PLUS</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <city>Moscow (Zelenograd)</city>
          <country>Russian Federation</country>
        </postal>
        <email>svan@elvis.ru</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date year="2026" month="October" day="08"/>
    <area>Security</area>
    <workgroup>IP Security Maintenance and Extensions</workgroup>
    <keyword>IKEv2</keyword>
    <keyword>Merkle Tree Certificates</keyword>
    <keyword>ML-DSA</keyword>
    <keyword>SLH-DSA</keyword>
    <keyword>post-quantum</keyword>
    <abstract>
      <?line 51?>

<t>This document specifies the use of Merkle Tree Certificates (MTCs) in
the Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2). An IKE peer
sends an MTC in place of a directly-signed end-entity certificate and
its chain of Certification Authority (CA) certificates. The MTC
carries an inclusion proof in place of CA signatures, which reduces
the size of the IKE_AUTH exchange, in particular with post-quantum
signature algorithms such as ML-DSA and SLH-DSA. This document
defines a Certificate Encoding for the Certificate Request payload
that carries trust anchor identifiers. An IKE peer uses these
identifiers to indicate the MTC CAs and landmarks it trusts.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <?line 64?>

<section anchor="introduction">
      <name>Introduction</name>
      <t>IKEv2 <xref target="RFC7296"/> peers commonly authenticate using X.509 certificates
<xref target="RFC5280"/> and the "Digital Signature" authentication method
<xref target="RFC7427"/>. An IKE peer typically sends its end-entity certificate
and one or more intermediate Certification Authority (CA)
certificates in CERT payloads. Each of these certificates contains a
public key and a signature from the CA that issued it. The size of
these certificates grows with the migration to post-quantum
signature algorithms. For example, <xref target="I-D.ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-pqc-auth"/>
specifies the use of ML-DSA in IKEv2. ML-DSA-44, ML-DSA-65, and
ML-DSA-87 signatures are 2,420, 3,309, and 4,627 octets, and their
public keys are 1,312, 1,952, and 2,592 octets (Section 11 of
<xref target="RFC9958"/>). With ML-DSA-65, each certificate carries at least 5,261
octets of public key and signature, so an end-entity certificate and
one intermediate CA certificate together exceed 10,000 octets before
the AUTH payload is added. The size grows much higher with SLH-DSA,
whose signatures range from 7,856 octets for
SLH-DSA-{SHA2,SHAKE}-128s to 49,856 octets for
SLH-DSA-{SHA2,SHAKE}-256f (Section 11 of <xref target="RFC9958"/>). IKE_AUTH
messages of this size depend on IKE fragmentation <xref target="RFC7383"/>, and
each additional fragment increases the probability of loss and the
latency of the exchange (Section 12 of <xref target="RFC9958"/>).</t>
      <t>Merkle Tree Certificates <xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/> reduce
this overhead. An MTC CA does not sign individual certificates. It adds
each certificate's contents as an entry to an issuance log, an
append-only log represented as a Merkle tree, and signs subtrees of that
log. A subtree covers a range of consecutive entries. Cosigners sign the
same subtrees after verifying that their views of the log are
consistent. A standalone certificate contains an inclusion proof to a
subtree and cosignatures over that subtree. A CA that issues
landmark-relative certificates also maintains a landmark sequence for
each issuance log. Periodically, the CA records the current number of
entries in the log as a new landmark. The subtrees that cover the
entries added since the previous landmark are the landmark subtrees
(Section 6.4.1 of <xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/>). Relying
parties obtain the hashes of the landmark subtrees in advance, as
trusted subtrees, through a channel outside the application protocol. A
landmark-relative certificate contains an inclusion proof to a landmark
subtree and no signatures. The relying party validates it by comparing
the subtree hash computed from the inclusion proof with the trusted
subtree hash it holds.</t>
      <t>A landmark-relative certificate is usable only if the relying party
holds the landmark subtree that the certificate's inclusion proof
leads to. The authenticating party therefore has to learn which
landmarks the relying party holds before it selects a certificate.
The MTC specification defines landmark group IDs for this purpose
(Section 8.2.1 of <xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/>). A relying
party whose latest trusted subtree in an issuance log is from a given
landmark advertises a single landmark group ID for that log. This one
identifier tells the authenticating party that the relying party
accepts both the CA's standalone certificates and the
landmark-relative certificates of that issuance log up to that
landmark. In TLS, the relying party sends landmark group IDs in the
trust_anchors extension <xref target="I-D.ietf-tls-trust-anchor-ids"/>.</t>
      <t>IKEv2 has no equivalent mechanism. A peer indicates its trust anchors
in the Certificate Request (CERTREQ) payload (Section 3.7 of
<xref target="RFC7296"/>). For X.509 certificates, the Certification Authority
field of CERTREQ is a list of SHA-1 hashes of the Subject Public Key
Info of trusted CA certificates. This encoding does not meet the
needs of MTC:</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>A CERTREQ entry identifies a CA, not the landmarks the relying party
holds. A standalone certificate and a landmark-relative certificate
for the same entry have the same issuer. A CERTREQ entry for an MTC
CA therefore cannot tell the authenticating party whether a
landmark-relative certificate is acceptable. For the same reason,
the MTC specification recommends that TLS relying parties do not
list MTC CAs in the certificate_authorities extension (Section 8 of
<xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/>), which conveys distinguished
names of trusted CAs.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>A landmark has no public key. A landmark-relative certificate is
validated against a trusted subtree hash, not against a CA public
key, so no SHA-1 hash of a Subject Public Key Info identifies a
landmark.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>The landmarks a relying party holds change as the CA allocates new
landmarks and old landmarks expire. A hash of a CA public key is
static and cannot convey this state.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Overloading the existing encoding with values derived from trust
anchor identifiers would change its semantics. A peer that does not
implement this specification would interpret those values as hashes
of CA public keys.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <t>This document specifies the use of MTCs in IKEv2. It defines:</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>A Certificate Encoding value, "Trust Anchor Identifiers", for the
CERTREQ payload. With this encoding, the Certification Authority
field of the CERTREQ payload carries the trust anchor IDs
<xref target="I-D.ietf-tls-trust-anchor-ids"/> that
<xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/> defines for MTCs.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>How a peer selects between its landmark-relative certificate and
its standalone certificate.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <t>The mechanism is independent of the signature algorithm used by the
end-entity key and by the CA and cosigners. It applies to MTCs with
traditional signature algorithms and with post-quantum signature
algorithms. This document uses ML-DSA and SLH-DSA as examples. The
mechanism applies to any IKEv2 deployment that uses certificate-based
authentication. How IKE peers obtain trusted subtrees is out of scope.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="conventions-and-definitions">
      <name>Conventions and Definitions</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>
      <?line -18?>

<t>This document uses the terms initiator, responder, IKE SA, and the
names of IKEv2 exchanges and payloads as defined in <xref target="RFC7296"/>.</t>
      <t>This document uses the following terms defined in
<xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/>: authenticating party, relying
party, certification authority (CA), issuance log, cosigner,
cosignature, subtree, inclusion proof, landmark, landmark subtree,
standalone certificate, landmark-relative certificate, and
directly-signed certificate. A trusted subtree is a landmark subtree
that a relying party has obtained in advance and trusts, as described
in Section 7.4 of <xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/>. In IKEv2, the
authenticating party is the peer that sends its certificate in the
CERT payload and authenticates using the AUTH payload, and the
relying party is the peer that validates that certificate. When both
peers authenticate using certificates, each peer acts in both roles.</t>
      <t>This document uses the term trust anchor ID as defined in
<xref target="I-D.ietf-tls-trust-anchor-ids"/>, and the following terms defined in
<xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/>:</t>
      <dl>
        <dt>CA ID:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>The trust anchor ID, denoted caID, that identifies an MTC CA
(Section 5.1 of <xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/>).</t>
        </dd>
        <dt>Landmark group ID:</dt>
        <dd>
          <t>The trust anchor ID {caID landmarkGroups(2) N L}, where N is a log
number and L is a landmark number (Sections 5.1 and 8.2.1 of
<xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/>). A relying party that sends
it indicates that it accepts:
</t>
          <ul spacing="normal">
            <li>
              <t>every standalone certificate issued by the CA, from any of its
issuance logs, and</t>
            </li>
            <li>
              <t>every landmark-relative certificate constructed from an unexpired
landmark M of issuance log N, where M is less than or equal to L.</t>
            </li>
          </ul>
        </dd>
      </dl>
    </section>
    <section anchor="overview">
      <name>Overview</name>
      <t>Each IKE peer that implements this specification has an MTC issued
by an MTC CA. The peer first obtains the MTC as a standalone
certificate. Once a landmark covers the MTC, the peer also obtains
the landmark-relative certificate for the same MTC (Section 6.4 of
<xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/>). Both certificates carry the
same subject, public key, and serial number. They differ only in the
inclusion proof and signatures.</t>
      <t>Each peer is also configured with the MTC CAs it trusts (Section 7.1
of <xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/>) and, optionally, with
trusted subtrees for those CAs.</t>
      <t>The exchange proceeds as follows:</t>
      <ol spacing="normal" type="1"><li>
          <t>The responder sends a CERTREQ payload with the "Trust Anchor
Identifiers" encoding (<xref target="taid-certreq"/>). The payload lists trust
anchor IDs, typically one landmark group ID for each issuance log for
which the responder holds trusted subtrees. The responder sends this
payload in the IKE_SA_INIT response as defined in <xref target="RFC7296"/>. In
some cases this payload can additionally be sent in the
IKE_INTERMEDIATE <xref target="RFC9242"/> response (as per Section 3.1 of
<xref target="RFC9593"/>).</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>The initiator selects its landmark-relative certificate or its
standalone certificate based on the responder's trust anchor IDs
(<xref target="selection"/>). It sends the selected certificate in the IKE_AUTH
request, together with its own CERTREQ payload with the "Trust
Anchor Identifiers" encoding.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>The responder selects its certificate in the same way, based on
the initiator's trust anchor IDs, and sends it in the IKE_AUTH
response.</t>
        </li>
      </ol>
      <t>An authenticating party that does not receive a CERTREQ payload with the
"Trust Anchor Identifiers" encoding does not send an MTC. In that case,
the choice of certificate is out of scope of this document.</t>
      <t>The relying party validates the received MTC as described in Section 7.2
of <xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/>. The AUTH payload is computed
and verified as specified in <xref target="RFC7296"/>. This document does not change
its processing.</t>
      <t><xref target="fig-flow"/> shows the exchange when the IKE_INTERMEDIATE exchange is
used to carry an additional key exchange <xref target="RFC9370"/>. Payloads not
relevant to this document are omitted.</t>
      <figure anchor="fig-flow">
        <name>IKEv2 Exchange with MTC</name>
        <artset>
          <artwork type="svg"><svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" version="1.1" height="256" width="512" viewBox="0 0 512 256" class="diagram" text-anchor="middle" font-family="monospace" font-size="13px" stroke-linecap="round">
              <path d="M 456,80 L 456,88" fill="none" stroke="black"/>
              <path d="M 8,48 L 504,48" fill="none" stroke="black"/>
              <path d="M 256,64 L 280,64" fill="none" stroke="black"/>
              <path d="M 256,80 L 280,80" fill="none" stroke="black"/>
              <path d="M 256,128 L 280,128" fill="none" stroke="black"/>
              <path d="M 256,144 L 280,144" fill="none" stroke="black"/>
              <path d="M 256,208 L 280,208" fill="none" stroke="black"/>
              <path d="M 256,224 L 280,224" fill="none" stroke="black"/>
              <polygon class="arrowhead" points="288,208 276,202.4 276,213.6" fill="black" transform="rotate(0,280,208)"/>
              <polygon class="arrowhead" points="288,128 276,122.4 276,133.6" fill="black" transform="rotate(0,280,128)"/>
              <polygon class="arrowhead" points="288,64 276,58.4 276,69.6" fill="black" transform="rotate(0,280,64)"/>
              <polygon class="arrowhead" points="264,224 252,218.4 252,229.6" fill="black" transform="rotate(180,256,224)"/>
              <polygon class="arrowhead" points="264,144 252,138.4 252,149.6" fill="black" transform="rotate(180,256,144)"/>
              <polygon class="arrowhead" points="264,80 252,74.4 252,85.6" fill="black" transform="rotate(180,256,80)"/>
              <g class="text">
                <text x="40" y="36">Initiator</text>
                <text x="344" y="36">Responder</text>
                <text x="20" y="68">HDR,</text>
                <text x="64" y="68">SAi1,</text>
                <text x="108" y="68">KEi,</text>
                <text x="140" y="68">Ni</text>
                <text x="324" y="84">HDR,</text>
                <text x="368" y="84">SAr1,</text>
                <text x="412" y="84">KEr,</text>
                <text x="444" y="84">Nr</text>
                <text x="408" y="100">CERTREQ(TAID)</text>
                <text x="20" y="132">HDR,</text>
                <text x="52" y="132">SK</text>
                <text x="100" y="132">{KEi(1)}</text>
                <text x="324" y="148">HDR,</text>
                <text x="356" y="148">SK</text>
                <text x="404" y="148">{KEr(1)}</text>
                <text x="20" y="180">HDR,</text>
                <text x="52" y="180">SK</text>
                <text x="88" y="180">{IDi,</text>
                <text x="156" y="180">CERT(MTC),</text>
                <text x="76" y="196">CERTREQ(TAID),</text>
                <text x="160" y="196">AUTH,</text>
                <text x="40" y="212">SAi2,</text>
                <text x="84" y="212">TSi,</text>
                <text x="124" y="212">TSr}</text>
                <text x="324" y="228">HDR,</text>
                <text x="356" y="228">SK</text>
                <text x="392" y="228">{IDr,</text>
                <text x="460" y="228">CERT(MTC),</text>
                <text x="344" y="244">AUTH,</text>
                <text x="392" y="244">SAr2,</text>
                <text x="436" y="244">TSi,</text>
                <text x="476" y="244">TSr}</text>
              </g>
            </svg>
          </artwork>
          <artwork type="ascii-art"><![CDATA[
Initiator                             Responder
---------------------------------------------------------------
HDR, SAi1, KEi, Ni             --->
                               <---   HDR, SAr1, KEr, Nr,
                                            CERTREQ(TAID)

HDR, SK {KEi(1)}               --->
                               <---   HDR, SK {KEr(1)}

HDR, SK {IDi, CERT(MTC),
  CERTREQ(TAID), AUTH,
  SAi2, TSi, TSr}              --->
                               <---   HDR, SK {IDr, CERT(MTC),
                                        AUTH, SAr2, TSi, TSr}
]]></artwork>
        </artset>
      </figure>
      <t>In <xref target="fig-flow"/>, CERTREQ(TAID) denotes a CERTREQ payload with the "Trust
Anchor Identifiers" encoding, and CERT(MTC) denotes a CERT payload
carrying a landmark-relative certificate or a standalone certificate.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="taid-certreq">
      <name>"Trust Anchor Identifiers" Certificate Encoding</name>
      <section anchor="format">
        <name>Format</name>
        <t>This document defines the "Trust Anchor Identifiers" Certificate
Encoding (&lt;TBA by IANA&gt;) for the CERTREQ payload (Section 3.7 of
<xref target="RFC7296"/>). When the Cert Encoding field of a CERTREQ payload is set
to "Trust Anchor Identifiers", the Certification Authority field
contains a list of trust anchor IDs. Each element of the list has the
same format as the TrustAnchorID structure defined in Section 4 of
<xref target="I-D.ietf-tls-trust-anchor-ids"/>: a one-octet length followed by the
binary representation of the trust anchor ID. The elements are
concatenated with no other formatting.</t>
        <figure anchor="fig-taid-certreq">
          <name>CERTREQ Payload with 'Trust Anchor Identifiers' Encoding</name>
          <artwork><![CDATA[
                     1                   2                   3
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Next Payload  |C|  RESERVED   |         Payload Length        |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Cert Encoding |   Length 1    |                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                               |
~                     Trust Anchor ID 1                         ~
|                                                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|   Length 2    |                                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                                               |
~                     Trust Anchor ID 2                         ~
|                                                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~                              ...                              ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
]]></artwork>
        </figure>
        <dl>
          <dt>Cert Encoding (1 octet):</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>"Trust Anchor Identifiers" (&lt;TBA by IANA&gt;).</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Length (1 octet):</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>The length in octets of the following Trust Anchor ID field. The
value <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be between 1 and 32, inclusive (Section 4 of
<xref target="I-D.ietf-tls-trust-anchor-ids"/>).</t>
          </dd>
          <dt>Trust Anchor ID (variable):</dt>
          <dd>
            <t>The binary representation of a trust anchor ID (as per Section 4 of
<xref target="I-D.ietf-tls-trust-anchor-ids"/>).</t>
          </dd>
        </dl>
        <t>The list <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> contain at least one trust anchor ID. The list is
unordered.</t>
        <t>The CA ID, log number, and landmark number are not separate fields.
They are components of the trust anchor ID. A trust anchor ID is a
relative object identifier, and its binary representation is the
contents octets of its DER encoding, in which each component is
encoded in base-128 (Section 4 of <xref target="I-D.ietf-tls-trust-anchor-ids"/>).
For example, a relying party that holds trusted subtrees up to
landmark 42 of issuance log 8 of the CA with CA ID 32473.100 sends the
landmark group ID 32473.100.2.8.42. Its components are the CA ID
(32473.100), the landmarkGroups arc (2), the log number (8), and the
landmark number (42). It is encoded as:</t>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
Length:          0x07
Trust Anchor ID: 0x81 0xfd 0x59  (32473)
                 0x64            (100)
                 0x02            (landmarkGroups)
                 0x08            (log number 8)
                 0x2a            (landmark number 42)
]]></artwork>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sending-and-receiving">
        <name>Sending and Receiving</name>
        <t>A relying party that trusts one or more MTC CAs sends a single
CERTREQ payload with the "Trust Anchor Identifiers" encoding. The
payload lists the trust anchor IDs for all the MTC CAs that the
relying party trusts. For each MTC CA, the list contains (Sections 8.1
and 8.2.1 of <xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/>):</t>
        <ul spacing="normal">
          <li>
            <t>If the relying party holds trusted subtrees for the CA: for each
issuance log of the CA for which it holds trusted subtrees, the
landmark group ID with the latest landmark whose landmark subtrees
it holds.</t>
          </li>
          <li>
            <t>Otherwise: the CA ID caID.</t>
          </li>
        </ul>
        <t>A relying party that also trusts CAs that issue directly-signed
certificates sends a separate CERTREQ payload for those CAs with one of
the appropriate encodings, e.g. the "X.509 Certificate - Signature"
(Section 3.7 of <xref target="RFC7296"/>).</t>
        <t>The responder sends the CERTREQ payload with the "Trust Anchor
Identifiers" encoding in the IKE_SA_INIT response, as defined in
<xref target="RFC7296"/>. In some situations the CERTREQ payload can also be repeated
in the IKE_INTERMEDIATE <xref target="RFC9242"/> response (as per Section 3.1 of
<xref target="RFC9593"/>).</t>
        <t>The initiator sends the CERTREQ payload with the
"Trust Anchor Identifiers" encoding in the IKE_AUTH request.</t>
        <t>The authenticating party uses the received trust anchor IDs to select
its certificate as described in <xref target="selection"/>, and ignores trust
anchor IDs it does not recognize.</t>
        <t>An IKE endpoint that does not implement this specification ignores the
CERTREQ payload with the "Trust Anchor Identifiers" encoding, as
specified in Section 3.2.8.1 of <xref target="RFC4945"/>.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="selection">
      <name>Certificate Selection</name>
      <t>The authenticating party holds the following certificates for its
MTC, issued by the CA with CA ID caID from issuance log N:</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>The standalone certificate.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>The landmark-relative certificate, constructed from landmark L of
issuance log N, once that landmark covers the MTC.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <t>The authenticating party receives a list of trust anchor IDs from the
relying party, in the CERTREQ payload with the "Trust Anchor
Identifiers" encoding (<xref target="taid-certreq"/>). It selects the certificate to
send as follows (Sections 8.1 and 8.2.1 of
<xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/>):</t>
      <ol spacing="normal" type="1"><li>
          <t>If the list contains a landmark group ID of caID for issuance log N
with a landmark number greater than or equal to L, the
authenticating party sends the landmark-relative certificate.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Otherwise, if the list contains the CA ID caID, or a landmark group
ID of caID for any issuance log and any landmark number, the
authenticating party sends the standalone certificate.</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>Otherwise, the authenticating party does not send an MTC.</t>
        </li>
      </ol>
      <t>The authenticating party <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> send the landmark-relative
certificate unless rule 1 applies.</t>
      <t>For example, an authenticating party holds a standalone certificate
and a landmark-relative certificate from landmark 42 of issuance log 8
of the CA with CA ID 32473.100. If it receives the landmark group ID
32473.100.2.8.45, rule 1 applies and it sends the landmark-relative
certificate. If it receives the landmark group ID 32473.100.2.8.40,
or the CA ID 32473.100, rule 2 applies and it sends the standalone
certificate.</t>
      <t>The authenticating party sends the selected certificate in a CERT
payload with Cert Encoding "X.509 Certificate - Signature"
(Section 3.6 of <xref target="RFC7296"/>).</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="error-handling">
      <name>Error Handling</name>
      <t>Error handling for rejected MTCs is left for a future version of
this document.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="landmark-provisioning-considerations">
      <name>Landmark Provisioning Considerations</name>
      <t>An IKE peer acting as a relying party obtains its MTC CA
configuration and trusted subtrees outside IKEv2. Section 7.4 of
<xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/> does not prescribe how relying
parties obtain trusted subtrees. For IKE peers, possible mechanisms
include certificate enrollment protocols, device management, and
local configuration.</t>
      <t>A relying party whose trusted subtrees are not current still accepts
standalone certificates. The authenticating party sends a
landmark-relative certificate only if it matches the trust anchor IDs
that the relying party advertised.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="security-considerations">
      <name>Security Considerations</name>
      <t>The security considerations of <xref target="RFC7296"/>,
<xref target="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs"/>, and
<xref target="I-D.ietf-tls-trust-anchor-ids"/> apply.</t>
      <t>The peers are not authenticated when the CERTREQ payload is
received. If an attacker removes or modifies this payload in the
IKE_SA_INIT exchange, the peers detect
it when they verify the AUTH payload, which covers the IKE_SA_INIT
messages (Section 2.15 of <xref target="RFC7296"/>). Modifications to the
IKE_INTERMEDIATE exchange are detected in the same way (Section 3.3.2
of <xref target="RFC9242"/>).</t>
      <t>The trust anchor IDs reveal the MTC CAs that a peer trusts and how
current its trusted subtrees are. They are encrypted when sent in the
IKE_INTERMEDIATE or IKE_AUTH exchange, but can be visible to
an active attacker on the path. The content of the CERTREQ payload
in the IKE_SA_INIT response is also visible to a passive observer.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="iana-considerations">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <t>IANA is requested to assign a value from the "IKEv2 Certificate
Encodings" registry:</t>
      <table>
        <thead>
          <tr>
            <th align="left">Value</th>
            <th align="left">Certificate Encoding</th>
            <th align="left">Reference</th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">TBA</td>
            <td align="left">Trust Anchor Identifiers</td>
            <td align="left">This document</td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <back>
    <references anchor="sec-combined-references">
      <name>References</name>
      <references anchor="sec-normative-references">
        <name>Normative References</name>
        <reference anchor="RFC4945">
          <front>
            <title>The Internet IP Security PKI Profile of IKEv1/ISAKMP, IKEv2, and PKIX</title>
            <author fullname="B. Korver" initials="B." surname="Korver"/>
            <date month="August" year="2007"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>The Internet Key Exchange (IKE) and Public Key Infrastructure for X.509 (PKIX) certificate profile both provide frameworks that must be profiled for use in a given application. This document provides a profile of IKE and PKIX that defines the requirements for using PKI technology in the context of IKE/IPsec. The document complements protocol specifications such as IKEv1 and IKEv2, which assume the existence of public key certificates and related keying materials, but which do not address PKI issues explicitly. This document addresses those issues. The intended audience is implementers of PKI for IPsec. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4945"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4945"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC7296">
          <front>
            <title>Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)</title>
            <author fullname="C. Kaufman" initials="C." surname="Kaufman"/>
            <author fullname="P. Hoffman" initials="P." surname="Hoffman"/>
            <author fullname="Y. Nir" initials="Y." surname="Nir"/>
            <author fullname="P. Eronen" initials="P." surname="Eronen"/>
            <author fullname="T. Kivinen" initials="T." surname="Kivinen"/>
            <date month="October" year="2014"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes version 2 of the Internet Key Exchange (IKE) protocol. IKE is a component of IPsec used for performing mutual authentication and establishing and maintaining Security Associations (SAs). This document obsoletes RFC 5996, and includes all of the errata for it. It advances IKEv2 to be an Internet Standard.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="STD" value="79"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7296"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7296"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs">
          <front>
            <title>Merkle Tree Certificates</title>
            <author fullname="David Benjamin" initials="D." surname="Benjamin">
              <organization>Google LLC</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Devon O'Brien" initials="D." surname="O'Brien">
              <organization>Apple Inc.</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Bas Westerbaan" initials="B." surname="Westerbaan">
              <organization>Cloudflare</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Luke Valenta" initials="L." surname="Valenta">
              <organization>Cloudflare</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Filippo Valsorda" initials="F." surname="Valsorda">
              <organization>Geomys</organization>
            </author>
            <date day="7" month="October" year="2026"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>   This document describes Merkle Tree certificates, a new form of X.509
   certificates which integrate public logging of the certificate, in
   the style of Certificate Transparency.  The integrated design reduces
   logging overhead in the face of both shorter-lived certificates and
   large post-quantum signature algorithms, while still achieving
   comparable security properties to existing X.509 constructions and
   Certificate Transparency.  Merkle Tree certificates additionally
   admit an optional size optimization that avoids signatures
   altogether, at the cost of only applying to up-to-date relying
   parties and older certificates.

              </t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-plants-merkle-tree-certs-07"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-tls-trust-anchor-ids">
          <front>
            <title>TLS Trust Anchor Identifiers</title>
            <author fullname="Bob Beck" initials="B." surname="Beck">
              <organization>OpenSSL</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="David Benjamin" initials="D." surname="Benjamin">
              <organization>Google LLC</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Devon O'Brien" initials="D." surname="O'Brien">
         </author>
            <author fullname="Kyle Nekritz" initials="K." surname="Nekritz">
              <organization>Meta</organization>
            </author>
            <date day="30" month="September" year="2026"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>   This document defines the TLS Trust Anchors extension, a mechanism
   for a TLS client or server to select a certificate to present based
   on the peer's trusted certification authorities.  It describes
   certification authorities more succinctly than the TLS Certificate
   Authorities extension.

              </t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-tls-trust-anchor-ids-06"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC2119">
          <front>
            <title>Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
            <author fullname="S. Bradner" initials="S." surname="Bradner"/>
            <date month="March" year="1997"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2119"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2119"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8174">
          <front>
            <title>Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words</title>
            <author fullname="B. Leiba" initials="B." surname="Leiba"/>
            <date month="May" year="2017"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol specifications. This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the defined special meanings.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8174"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8174"/>
        </reference>
      </references>
      <references anchor="sec-informative-references">
        <name>Informative References</name>
        <reference anchor="RFC5280">
          <front>
            <title>Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile</title>
            <author fullname="D. Cooper" initials="D." surname="Cooper"/>
            <author fullname="S. Santesson" initials="S." surname="Santesson"/>
            <author fullname="S. Farrell" initials="S." surname="Farrell"/>
            <author fullname="S. Boeyen" initials="S." surname="Boeyen"/>
            <author fullname="R. Housley" initials="R." surname="Housley"/>
            <author fullname="W. Polk" initials="W." surname="Polk"/>
            <date month="May" year="2008"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This memo profiles the X.509 v3 certificate and X.509 v2 certificate revocation list (CRL) for use in the Internet. An overview of this approach and model is provided as an introduction. The X.509 v3 certificate format is described in detail, with additional information regarding the format and semantics of Internet name forms. Standard certificate extensions are described and two Internet-specific extensions are defined. A set of required certificate extensions is specified. The X.509 v2 CRL format is described in detail along with standard and Internet-specific extensions. An algorithm for X.509 certification path validation is described. An ASN.1 module and examples are provided in the appendices. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5280"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5280"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC7383">
          <front>
            <title>Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2) Message Fragmentation</title>
            <author fullname="V. Smyslov" initials="V." surname="Smyslov"/>
            <date month="November" year="2014"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes a way to avoid IP fragmentation of large Internet Key Exchange Protocol version 2 (IKEv2) messages. This allows IKEv2 messages to traverse network devices that do not allow IP fragments to pass through.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7383"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7383"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC7427">
          <front>
            <title>Signature Authentication in the Internet Key Exchange Version 2 (IKEv2)</title>
            <author fullname="T. Kivinen" initials="T." surname="Kivinen"/>
            <author fullname="J. Snyder" initials="J." surname="Snyder"/>
            <date month="January" year="2015"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>The Internet Key Exchange Version 2 (IKEv2) protocol has limited support for the Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA). The current version only includes support for three Elliptic Curve groups, and there is a fixed hash algorithm tied to each group. This document generalizes IKEv2 signature support to allow any signature method supported by PKIX and also adds signature hash algorithm negotiation. This is a generic mechanism and is not limited to ECDSA; it can also be used with other signature algorithms.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7427"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7427"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC9242">
          <front>
            <title>Intermediate Exchange in the Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)</title>
            <author fullname="V. Smyslov" initials="V." surname="Smyslov"/>
            <date month="May" year="2022"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document defines a new exchange, called "Intermediate Exchange", for the Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2). This exchange can be used for transferring large amounts of data in the process of IKEv2 Security Association (SA) establishment. An example of the need to do this is using key exchange methods resistant to Quantum Computers (QCs) for IKE SA establishment. The Intermediate Exchange makes it possible to use the existing IKE fragmentation mechanism (which cannot be used in the initial IKEv2 exchange), helping to avoid IP fragmentation of large IKE messages if they need to be sent before IKEv2 SA is established.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9242"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9242"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC9370">
          <front>
            <title>Multiple Key Exchanges in the Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)</title>
            <author fullname="CJ. Tjhai" initials="CJ." surname="Tjhai"/>
            <author fullname="M. Tomlinson" initials="M." surname="Tomlinson"/>
            <author fullname="G. Bartlett" initials="G." surname="Bartlett"/>
            <author fullname="S. Fluhrer" initials="S." surname="Fluhrer"/>
            <author fullname="D. Van Geest" initials="D." surname="Van Geest"/>
            <author fullname="O. Garcia-Morchon" initials="O." surname="Garcia-Morchon"/>
            <author fullname="V. Smyslov" initials="V." surname="Smyslov"/>
            <date month="May" year="2023"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes how to extend the Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2) to allow multiple key exchanges to take place while computing a shared secret during a Security Association (SA) setup.</t>
              <t>This document utilizes the IKE_INTERMEDIATE exchange, where multiple key exchanges are performed when an IKE SA is being established. It also introduces a new IKEv2 exchange, IKE_FOLLOWUP_KE, which is used for the same purpose when the IKE SA is being rekeyed or is creating additional Child SAs.</t>
              <t>This document updates RFC 7296 by renaming a Transform Type 4 from "Diffie-Hellman Group (D-H)" to "Key Exchange Method (KE)" and renaming a field in the Key Exchange Payload from "Diffie-Hellman Group Num" to "Key Exchange Method". It also renames an IANA registry for this Transform Type from "Transform Type 4 - Diffie- Hellman Group Transform IDs" to "Transform Type 4 - Key Exchange Method Transform IDs". These changes generalize key exchange algorithms that can be used in IKEv2.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9370"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9370"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC9593">
          <front>
            <title>Announcing Supported Authentication Methods in the Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)</title>
            <author fullname="V. Smyslov" initials="V." surname="Smyslov"/>
            <date month="July" year="2024"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This specification defines a mechanism that allows implementations of the Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2) to indicate the list of supported authentication methods to their peers while establishing IKEv2 Security Associations (SAs). This mechanism improves interoperability when IKEv2 partners are configured with multiple credentials of different types for authenticating each other.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9593"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9593"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC9958">
          <front>
            <title>Post-Quantum Cryptography for Engineers</title>
            <author fullname="A. Banerjee" initials="A." surname="Banerjee"/>
            <author fullname="T. Reddy.K" initials="T." surname="Reddy.K"/>
            <author fullname="D. Schoinianakis" initials="D." surname="Schoinianakis"/>
            <author fullname="T. Hollebeek" initials="T." surname="Hollebeek"/>
            <author fullname="M. Ounsworth" initials="M." surname="Ounsworth"/>
            <date month="June" year="2026"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>The advent of a cryptographically relevant quantum computer (CRQC) would render state-of-the-art, traditional public key algorithms deployed today obsolete, as the mathematical assumptions underpinning their security would no longer hold. To address this, protocols and infrastructure must transition to post-quantum algorithms, which are designed to resist both traditional and quantum attacks. This document explains why engineers need to be aware of and understand post-quantum cryptography (PQC), and it details the impact of CRQCs on existing systems and the challenges involved in transitioning to post-quantum algorithms. Unlike previous cryptographic updates, this shift may require significant protocol redesign due to the unique properties of post-quantum algorithms.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9958"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9958"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-pqc-auth">
          <front>
            <title>Signature Authentication in the Internet Key Exchange Version 2 (IKEv2) using PQC</title>
            <author fullname="Tirumaleswar Reddy.K" initials="T." surname="Reddy.K">
              <organization>Nokia</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Valery Smyslov" initials="V." surname="Smyslov">
              <organization>ELVIS-PLUS</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Scott Fluhrer" initials="S." surname="Fluhrer">
              <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>
            </author>
            <date day="20" month="August" year="2026"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>   Signature-based authentication methods are utilized in the Internet
   Key Exchange Version 2 (IKEv2).  The current version of the IKEv2
   protocol, specified in RFC 7296, supports traditional digital
   signatures.

   This document specifies a generic mechanism for integrating post-
   quantum cryptographic (PQC) digital signature algorithms into the
   IKEv2 protocol.  The approach allows for seamless inclusion of any
   PQC signature scheme within the existing authentication framework of
   IKEv2.  Additionally, it outlines how Module-Lattice-Based Digital
   Signatures (ML-DSA) and Stateless Hash-Based Digital Signatures (SLH-
   DSA), can be employed as authentication methods within the IKEv2
   protocol, as they have been standardized by US NIST.

              </t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-pqc-auth-12"/>
        </reference>
      </references>
    </references>
  </back>
  <!-- ##markdown-source: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-->

</rfc>
