Secure Shell Working Group                                  J. Galbraith
Internet-Draft                                          VanDyke Software
Expires: October 18, 2004 November 24, 2005                                    P. Remaker
                                                      Cisco Systems, Inc
                                                          April 19, 2004
                                                            May 23, 2005

           Secure Shell (SSH) Session Channel Break Extension
                     draft-ietf-secsh-break-02.txt
                       draft-ietf-secsh-break-03

Status of this Memo

   This document

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is an Internet-Draft aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and is any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in full conformance accordance with
   all provisions of Section 10 6 of RFC2026. 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.

   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.
   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 October 18, 2004. November 24, 2005.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. (2005).

Abstract

   The Session Channel Break Extension provides a means to send a BREAK
   signal [2] over an SSH a Secure Shell (SSH) terminal session [5]. session.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Conventions Used in this Document  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  The Break Request  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  5
   4.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   4.  7
   5.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   6.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.1  9
     6.1   Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.2  9
     6.2   Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7  9
       Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7  9
       Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . .  8 11

1.  Introduction

   The SSH Secure Shell (SSH) session channel provides a mechanism for the
   client-user to interactively enter commands and receive output from a
   remote host while taking advantage of the SSH transport's privacy and
   integrity features.  SSH is increasingly being used to replace telnet Telnet
   for terminal access applications.

   A common application of the telnet Telnet protocol is the "Console Server"
   [2]
   [7] whereby a telnet NVT Telnet Network Virtual Terminal (NVT) can be connected
   to a physical RS-232/V.24 asynchronous port, making the telnet Telnet NVT
   appear as a locally attached terminal to that port, and making that
   physical port appear as a network addressable device.  A number of
   major computer equipment vendors provide high level administrative
   functions through an asynchronous serial port and generally expect
   the attached terminal to be capable of send a BREAK signal.

   A BREAK signal is defined as the TxD signal being held in a SPACE
   ("0") state for a time greater than a whole character time.  In
   practice, a BREAK signal is typically 250 to 500 ms in length.

   The telnet Telnet protocol furnishes a means to send a "BREAK" signal, which
   RFC0854 [1] defines as a "a signal outside the USASCII set which is
   currently given local meaning within many systems." [1]  Console
   Server vendors interpret the TELNET BREAK signal as a physical BREAK
   signal, which can then allow access to the full range of
   adminisrative
   administrative functions available on an asynchronous serial console
   port.

   The lack of a similar facility in the SSH session channel has forced
   users to continue the use of telnet Telnet for the "Console Server"
   function.

2.  Conventions Used in this Document

   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 [2].

   The "byte", "boolean", "uint32", and "string" data types are defined
   in [3].

3.  The Break Request

   The following following channel specific request can be sent over a session
   channel to request that the remote host perform a BREAK operation.

        byte      SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_REQUEST
        uint32    recipient channel
        string    "break"
        boolean   want_reply
        uint32    break-length in milliseconds

   If the BREAK length cannot be controlled by the application receiving
   this request, the BREAK length parameter SHOULD be ignored and the
   default BREAK signal length of the chipset or underlying chipset
   driver SHOULD be sent.

   If the application receiving this request can control the
   BREAK-length, BREAK-
   length, the following suggestions are made regarding BREAK duration.
   If a BREAK duration request of greater than 3000ms is received, it
   SHOULD be processed as a 3000ms BREAK, in order to prevent an
   unreasonably long BREAK request causing the port to become
   unavailable for as long as 49.7 days while executing the BREAK.
   Applications that require a longer BREAK may choose to ignore this
   requirement.  If BREAK duration request of less than 500ms, is
   requested a BREAK of 500ms SHOULD be sent since most devices will
   recognize a BREAK of that length.  In the event that an application
   needs a shorter BREAK, this suggestion can be ignored.  If the
   BREAK-length BREAK-
   length parameter is 0, the BREAK SHOULD be sent as 500ms or the
   default BREAK signal length of the chipset or underlying chipset
   driver.

   If the SSH connection does not terminate on a physical serial port,
   the BREAK indication SHOULD be handled in an implementation-defined a manner consistent with
   the general use of BREAK as an attention/
   interrupt attention/interrupt signal; for
   instance, a service processor could use some other out-of-band
   facility to get the attention of a system it manages.

   In a case where an SSH connection cascades to another connection, the
   BREAK SHOULD be passed along the cascaded connection.  For example, a
   telnet
   Telnet session from an SSH shell should carry along an SSH initiated
   BREAK and an SSH client initited initiated from a telnet Telnet connection SHOULD
   pass a BREAK indication from the telnet Telnet connection.

   If the want_reply 'want_reply' boolean is set, the server MUST reply using an
   SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_SUCCESS or SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_FAILURE [5] messages. message.  If a
   BREAK of any kind was preformed, SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_SUCCESS MUST be
   sent.  If no BREAK was preformed, SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_FAILURE MUST be
   sent.

   This operation SHOULD be supported by any general purpose SSH client.

3.

4.  Security Considerations

   Many computer systems treat serial consoles as local and secured, and
   interpret a BREAK signal as an instruction to halt execution of the
   operating system or to enter priviliged privileged configuration modes.  Because
   of this, extra care should be taken to ensure that SSH access to
   BREAK-enabled ports are limited to users with appropriate priviliges privileges
   to execute such functions.  Alternatively, support for the BREAK
   facility MAY be imlemented implemented configurable or a per port or per server
   basis.

   Implementations that literally intepret interpret the BREAK length parameter
   without imposing the suggested BREAK time limit may cause a denial of
   service to or unexpected results from attached devices receiving the
   very long BREAK signal.

4.

5.  IANA Considerations

   IANA is requested to assign the Connection Protocol Channel Request
   Name "break" in accordance with [6].

6.  References

4.1

6.1  Normative References

   [1]  Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "Telnet Protocol Specification",
        STD 8, RFC 854, May 1983.

4.2  Informative References

   [2]  Harris, D., "Greater Scroll of Console Knowledge",  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
        Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 2004. 1997.

   [3]  Rinne, T.,  Ylonen, T., Kivinen, T. and S. Lehtinen, C. Lonvick, "SSH Protocol Architecture", draft-ietf-secsh-architecture-15
        draft-ietf-secsh-architecture-22 (work in progress), October 2003. March 2005.

   [4]  Rinne, T., Ylonen, T., Kivinen, T., Saarinen, M. and S.
        Lehtinen,  Lonvick, C., "SSH Transport Layer Protocol",
        draft-ietf-secsh-transport-17
        draft-ietf-secsh-transport-24 (work in progress), October 2003. March 2005.

   [5]  Rinne, T., Ylonen, T., Kivinen, T.  Lonvick, C. and S. Lehtinen, T. Ylonen, "SSH Connection Protocol", draft-ietf-secsh-connect-18
        draft-ietf-secsh-connect-25 (work in progress), October 2003. March 2005.

   [6]  Lehtinen, S. and C. Lonvick, "SSH Protocol Assigned Numbers",
        draft-ietf-secsh-assignednumbers-12 (work in progress),
        March 2005.

6.2  Informative References

   [7]  Harris, D., "Greater Scroll of Console Knowledge", March 2004,
        <http://www.conserver.com/consoles/>.

Authors' Addresses

   Joseph Galbraith
   VanDyke Software
   4848 Tramway Ridge Blvd
   Suite 101
   Albuquerque, NM  87111
   US

   Phone: +1 505 332 5700
   EMail:
   Email: galb-list@vandyke.com
   Phillip Remaker
   Cisco Systems, Inc
   170 West Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA  95120
   US

   Phone: +1 408 526 8614
   EMail:
   Email: remaker@cisco.com

Intellectual Property Statement

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   intellectual property
   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; neither nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the
   IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
   standards-related documentation RFC documents can be
   found in BCP-11. BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of
   claims of rights IPR disclosures made available for publication 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 implementors implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. 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 which that may cover technology that may be required to practice implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF Executive
   Director.

Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.

Disclaimer of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English.

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees. Validity

   This document and the information contained herein is are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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.

Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).  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.

Acknowledgment

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.